THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

RIVERSIDE 


iHmertcan  i|i£itorical  ^ertesi 

GENERAL  EDITOR 

CHARLES   H.  HASKINS 

Piofestor  of  History  in  Harvard  University 


EUROPE  SINCE  1815 


BY 


CHARLES   DOWNER   HAZEN 


WITH  FOURTEEN  COLORED  MAPS 


NEW    YORK 
HENRY  HOLT  AND  COMPANY 


H3 


c 
^ 


Copyright,  19  JO, 

BY 

HENRY  HOLT  AND  COMPANY 
10 


THE  QUINN  *  BOOEH  CO.  PRESS 


PREFACE 

The  purpose  of  this  book  is  the  presentation  of  the  history 
of  Europe  since  the  downfall  of  Napoleon.  Needless  to  say, 
only  the  broader  lines  of  the  evolution  of  so  crowded  a  cen- 
tury can  be  traced  in  a  single  volume.  I  have,  moreover, 
omitted  many  subjects,  frequently  described,  in  order  to 
give  a  fuller  treatment  to  those  which,  in  my  opinion,  are 
more  important.  I  have  endeavored  to  explain  the  internal 
development  of  the  various  nations,  and  their  external  rela- 
tions in  so  far  as  these  have  been  vital  or  deeply  formative. 
I  have  also  attempted  to  preserve  a  reasonable  balance  be- 
tween the  different  periods  of  the  century  and  to  avoid  the 
danger  of  over-emphasis. 

The  great  tendencies  of  the  century,  the  transference  of 
power  from  oligarchies  to  democracies,  the  building  up  of 
nations  like  Germany  and  Italy  and  the  Balkan  states  which 
was  the  product  of  long  trains  of  causes,  of  sharp,  decisive 
events,  and  of  the  potent  activity  of  commanding  person- 
alities, the  gradual  expansion  of  Europe  and  its  insistent 
and  growing  pressure  upon  the  world  outside,  shown  in  so 
many  ways  and  so  strikingly  in  this  age  of  imperialism  and 
world-politics,  the  increasing  consciousness  in  our  day  of  the 
urgency  of  economic  and  social  problems,  all  these  and  other 
tendencies  will,  I  trust,  emerge  from  the  following  pages, 
with  clearness  and  in  just  proportion. 

The  problem  of  arranging  material  covering  so  many  dif- 
ferent countries  and  presenting  such  varieties  of  circumstance 
and  condition  is  one  of  the  greatest  diflSculty.  It  arises  from 
the  fact  that  Europe  is  only  a  geographical  expression.  The 
author  is  not  writing  the  history  of  a  single  people  but  of  a 
dozen  different  peoples,  which,  having  much  in  common,  are 

V 


VI  PREFACE 

nevertheless  very  dissimilar  in  character,  in  problems,  in 
stages  of  development,  and  in  mental  outlook.  If  he  adopts 
the  chronological  order  (and  events  certainly  occurred  in 
chronological  sequence),  if  he  attempts  to  keep  the  histories 
of  a  dozen  different  countries  moving  along  together  as  they 
did  in  fact,  he  must  pass  continually  from  one  to  the  other 
and  his  narrative  inevitably  becomes  jerky,  spasmodic,  and 
confused.  If  on  the  other  hand  he  takes  each  nation  in 
turn,  recounting  its  history  from  starting  point  to  point  of 
conclusion,  he  gains  the  great  advantage  of  continuity,  which 
begets  understanding,  but  he  writes  a  dozen  histories,  not  one. 
He  therefore  compromises,  perforce,  with  his  intractable 
problem  and  works  out  a  method  of  presentation  of  whose 
vulnerability  he  is  probably  quite  as  acutely  conscious  as 
any  reader  could  be.  My  method  has  been  to  bring  down 
more  or  less  together  the  histories  of  those  countries  which 
have  so  intimately  and  significantly  interacted  upon  each 
other,  Austria,  Prussia,  France,  and  Italy,  that  the  evolution 
of  one  cannot  be,  even  approximately,  understood  apart  from 
a  knowledge  of  the  current  evolution  of  the  others.  I  then 
return  to  my  starting  point,  1815,  and  trace  the  histories  of 
England,  Russia,  Turkey  and  the  lesser  states  separately, 
gaining  the  advantage  of  being  able  to  show  their  continuous 
development.  I  hope  that  this  method  has  at  least  the  merit 
of  rendering  clearness  of  exposition  possible. 

My  narrative  is  based  to  some  extent  upon  an  examination 
of  the  sources,  although,  considering  the  vast  extent  of  the 
original  material  available,  this  has  been  necessarily  com- 
paratively limited.  It  is  based  chiefly,  as  probably  any 
synthetic  work  covering  so  large  a  field  must  be,  on  the 
elaborate  general  histories  of  different  periods  or  countries, 
on  biographies,  and  on  the  special  monographic  literature. 
These  are  indicated  in  the  bibliography  at  the  end  of  the 
volume  which  I  have  attempted  to  make  critical  and  descrip- 
tive rather  than  extensive.  It  has  been  impossible  for  me  to 
employ  footnotes  freely  and  consequently  I  am  restricted  to 


PREFACE  vii 

a  general  recognition  of  my  great  and  constant  indebtedness 
to  the  authorities  used,  a  recognition  which  I  wish  to  make  as 
explicit  and  as  grateful  as  it  must  be  brief  and  comprehensive. 

C.  D.  H. 

Northampton,  Massachuseits, 
December  31,  1909. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

PACE 

THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

The  Overthrow  of  Napoleon — The  Great  Coalition — The  Problem 
of  the  Government  of  France — Treaty  of  Paris — Congress  of 
Vienna — The  Great  Powers — The  Division  of  the  Spoils — Prin- 
ciple of  Legitimacy — Demands  of  Russia — Demands  of  Prussia 
• — The  Fate  of  Poland  and  Saxony — Russian  Acquisitions — 
Austrian  Acquisitions — English  Acquisitions — The  Future  of 
Italy — Italy  a  "  Geographical  Expression  " — Criticism  of  the 
Congress — The  Indignation  of  the  Germans — Defiance  of  the 
Principle  of  Nationalitv — Denunciation  of  the  Slave  Trade — 
The  "  Hundred  Days  "—Second  Treaty  of  Paris— The  Holy  Alli- 
ance— The  Allies  Promise  Aid  to  Each  Other — ^Unusual  Charac- 
ter of  the  Alliance — Quadruple  Alliance — Precautions  Against 
France — The  Concert  of  Powers — Quadruple  Alliance  and  Met- 
ternich — Alexander  I — Francis  I  of  Austria — Metternich — His 
Diplomatic  Skill — His  Self-esteem — His  Historical  Importance — 
Doctrine  of  Immobility 1 

CHAPTER  II 

REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

Lack  of  Unity  in  the  Austrian  Empire — Racial  Differences — Not  a 
German  Empire — Policy  of  Francis  I  and  Metternich — Austria 
a  Land  of  the  Old  Regime — Local  Government — The  Police 
System — The  System  of  Espionage — Application  of  the  Met- 
ternich System  in  Other  Countries — Germany  a  Loose  Confedera- 
tion—Varieties of  States — The  Diet — Its  Powers  not  Defined — 
Germany  not  a  Nation — The  International  Character  of  the  Con- 
federation— Dissatisfaction  of  the  Germans  with  This  System^ 
Why  the  Problem  of  German  Unity  was  so  Difficult — The  States- 
right  Feeling — Dualism  the  Outcome  of  German  Evolution — 
The  Demand  for  Constitutional  Government — Metternich's  Suc- 
cessful Opposition — Various  Forms  of  Government  in  the  Dif- 
ferent German  States — Popular  Sovereignty  Nowhere  Recog- 
nized— Constitutions  Granted  in  Certain  States — The  King  of 
Prussia  Becomes  Reactionary — Indignation  of  the  Liberals — 
Ferment  in  the  Universities — The  Wartburg  Festival — The  Mur- 
der of  Kotzebue — The  Holy  Alliance  Converted  into  an  Engine 
of  Oppression — The  Carlsbad  Decrees — Provision  Concerning 
Constitutional  Government — Control  of  the  Universities — Pro- 
hibition of  Student  Societies — Tlie  Censorship  of  the  Press- 
Reaction  the  Order  of  the  Day  in  Germany — The  Persecution  of 
Liberals — Prussia  a  Docile  Follower  of  Austria     ....     23 


X  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  III 

PAGE 

REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

Spain — Spanish  Constitution  of  1812 — Ferdinand  VII,  Abolition  of 
the  Constitution — Persecution  of  Liberals — Inefficiency  of  the 
Government — Disintegration  of  the  Spanish  Empire — Neglect 
of  the  Army  and  the  Navy— Revolution  of  1820-18:23— Italy- 
Napoleon  on  Italian  Unity — Significance  of  Napoleon's  Activity 
in  Italy — The  Awakening  of  Italy — The  Decision  of  the  Congress 
of  Vienna — The  Ten  Italian  States — The  Dominance  of  Austria — 
The  Lombardo-Venetian  Kingdom — The  Kingdom  of  Sardinia — 
The  States  of  the  Church— The  Kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies— Uni- 
versal Reaction — The  Carbonari — The  Revolution  of  1830  in 
Naples — The  Powers  Prepare  to  Suppress  These  Revolutions — 
The  Doctrine  of  the  Right  of  Intervention — The  Congress  of 
Aix-la-Chapelle,  1818— The  Congress  of  Troppau,  1830— The 
Congress  of  Laibach,  1821 — The  Revolution  in  Piedmont — 
Reasons  for  the  Failure  of  the  Movements  of  1820 — The  Congress 
of  Verona,  1822 — Reaction  in  Spain — The  Triumph  of  the  Holy 
Alliance — The  Monroe  Doctrine — The  "  Metternich  System  " 
Checked 45 


CHAPTER  IV 

FRANCE  UNDER  THE  RESTORATION 

The  Profound  Effects  of  the  French  Revolution — The  Restoration 
of  the  Bourbons  not  a  Restoration  of  the  Old  Regime — The 
Constitutional  Charter — The  Form  of  Government — The  Re- 
stricted Suffrage — Provisions  Concerning  Civil  Rights — Recog- 
nition of  the  Work  of  the  Revolution— Louis  XVIII— The  Diffi- 
culties of  His  Situation — The  Ultras — The  Center  Parties — The 
White  Terror— Louis  XVIII  Checks  the  Ultras— A  Period  of 
Moderate  Liberalism — The  I>iberation  of  the  Territory — Re- 
organization of  the  Armj^ — The  Electoral  Sj'stem — The  Press 
Law  of  1819 — Activity  of  the  Ultras — Election  of  Gregoire— 
Murder  of  the  Duke  of  Berry— Electoral  Law  of  1820— The 
Double  Vote — The  Censorship  Restored — French  Invasion  of 
Spain — Triumph  of  the  Ultras — Death  of  Louis  XVIII — 
Charles  X — Policy  of  the  New  King — The  Nobles  Indemnified 
for  Propertj'  Confiscated  During  the  Revolution — Method 
of  Paying  the  Indemnity — The  Law  Against  Sacrilege — 
Clerical  Reaction — Attempt  to  Re-establish  the  Principle  of 
Primogeniture — Attempt  to  Destroy  the  Freedom  of  the  Press — ■ 
Disbandment  of  the  National  Guard — Attempt  to  Stamp  Out 
the  Opposition  in  Parliament — The  Martignac  Ministry — The 
Polignac  Ministry — Widespread  Opposition  to  the  Ministry — 
Conflict  Between  Charles  X  and  the  Chamber  of  Deputies — The 
Ordinances  of  July — Charles  X's  Interpretation  of  the  Charter 
— The  King's  Mistaken  Judgment — The  Opposition  of  the  Liberal 
Editors  of  Paris — The  July  Revolution — The  Character  of  the 
Fighting — The  Ordinances  Withdrawn — The  Candidacy  of  Louis 
Philippe — Abdication  of  Charles  X — Louis  PhilijDpe  King — The 
End  of  the  Restoration 66 


CONTENTS  xi 

CHAPTER  V 

FAGB 

REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 

Wide-spread  Influence  of  the  July  Revolution — Powerlessness  of  the 
Holy  Alliance — The  Congress  of  Vienna  and  the  Kingdom  of 
the  Netherlands — A  Union  of  Two  Fundamentally  Dissimilar 
Peoples — The  Spirit  of  Nationality  Awakened  Among  the  Bel- 
gians— Difficulties  in  the  Drafting  of  the  Constitution — Friction 
Between  the  Belgians  and  the  Dutch— The  Influence  of  the  July 
Revolution — The  Belgians  Declare  Their  Independence — Inter- 
vention of  the  Holy  Allies  Prevented  by  Events  in  Poland — 
Recognition  of  the  Kingdom  of  Belgium — The  Restoration  of 
the  Kingdom  of  Poland  in  1815 — Alexander  I  Grants  a  Constitu- 
tion to  Poland — Friction  Between  the  Poles  and  the  Russians — 
Influence  of  the  July  Revolution — The  Polish  Expectation  of 
Foreign  Aid  Disappointed — The  Failure  of  the  Insurrection — 
Italy  After  the  Revolutions  of  1820 — Revolutionary  Movements 
in  1831 — The  Italians  Receive  No  Help  from  France — Austrian 
Intervention — The  Results  of  the  Insurrections — Revolution  in 
Germany — New  Measures  of  Repression — Metternich  Supreme  in 
Germajiy 100 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

The  Career  of  Louis  Philippe — His  Liberalism — His  Legal  Title 
to  the  Throne — -The  Constitution  Revised — The  Franchise 
Lowered — The  Character  of  the  July  Monarchy — Insecurity  of 
the  New  Regime — A  Period  of  Storm  and  Stress — The  Progressive 
Partj^^The  Conservative  Party — Popular  Unrest — Casimir- 
Perier  and  the  Policy  of  the  Conservatives — Foreign  Policy — Op- 
position Parties — The  Legitimists — The  Duchess  of  Berrj^ — Re- 
publican Insurrections — Vigorous  Measures  of  the  Government — 
The  Prosecution  of  Journalists — Attempts  upon  the  Life  of 
Louis  Philippe — The  September  Laws,  1835 — The  Press  Law — 
The  Bonapartists — Louis  Philippe  and  the  Napoleonic  Legend — 
Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte — The  Second  Funeral  of  Napoleon 
I — The  Boulogne  Fiasco — Ministerial  Instability — Rivalry  of 
Thiers  and  Guizot — Louis  Philippe  Intends  to  Rule — Personal 
Government — Thiers  and  the  Eastern  Question — Resignation  of 
Thiers — Guizot,  Prime  Minister — Guizot's  Political  Principles— 
The  Government  Scrupulously  Parliamentary — How  the  Gov- 
ernment Obtained  Its  Majorities — The  Manipulation  of  the 
Voters — The  Manipulation  of  the  Deputies — The  Servility 
of  Parliament — Demand  for  Electoral  and  Parliamentary  Re- 
form— Rigid  Opposition  of  the  Guizot  Ministry — Rise  of  Radi- 
calism— Economic  Distress — ^^Introduction  of  tlie  Factory  System 
— Condition  of  the  Working  Classes — Growth  of  Socialism — 
Louis  Blanc — Wide-spread  Opposition  to  the  Policy  of  the  Gov- 
ernment— Fusion  of  the  Opposing  Parties — The  "  Reform 
Banquets  " — Emergence  of  Lamartine — The  People  Support  the 
Demand  for  Reform — The  Revolution  of  February,  1848 — 
Resignation  of  Guizot — The  Overthrow  of  Louis  Philippe — The 
Rise  of  the  Second  Republic 114 


xii  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  VII 

PAGB 

CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  TWO  REVOLUTIONS 

The  February  Revolution  a  Signal  for  Other  Revolutions — The 
General  Character  of  the  Period  between  1830  and  1848— Evolu- 
tion of  Prussia — Great  Intellectual  Activity — The  Achievement 
of  Prussian  Unity  Imperative — Revision  of  the  System  of  Tax- 
ation—The Question  of  the  Tariif— The  Zollverein— The  Ad- 
vantages of  the  Zollverein — Death  of  Frederick  William  III — 
Frederick  William  IV — The  Demand  for  a  Parliament — The  Let- 
ter Patent  of  February  3,  1847 — Popular  Dissatisfaction— Con- 
flict Between  Frederick  William  IV  and  the  United  Landtag — 
Austria  not  a  Homogeneous  State — Political  Stagnation — The  In- 
dustrial Revolution — The  Development  of  Nationalities  Within 
the  Empire— Bohemia— Hungary — The  Hungarian  Constitution — 
The  Importance  of  the  Nobility — The  Prevalence  of  Feudalism — 
Szechenyi  and  Reform— The  Policy  of  the  Diet — The  Language 
Question^Rise  of  a  Radical  Party — Louis  Kossuth — The  De- 
mands of  the  Hungarians  in  1847 — Italy  After  1831 — Importance 
of  a  Group  of  Writers — Joseph  Mazzini — His  Intense  Patriotism 
— His  Imprisonment— Founder  of  "  Young  Italy  " — The  Methods 
of  the  Society — The  Aims  of  the  Society — Unity,  a  Practicable 
Ideal — Mazzini  as  a  Conspirator — Gioberti — D'Azeglio — Balbo— 
The  Risorgimento— Pius  IX,  Pope,  1846-1878— Charles  Albert, 
King  of  Piedmont — Italy  on  the  Brink  of  Revolution  .        .        .   145 

CHAPTER  VIII 

CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

The  Great  Mid-century  Uprising — Vienna  the  Storm-center— The 
Decisive  Intervention  of  Hungary — The  Overthrow  of  Metter- 
nich — The  March  Laws — Hungary  Practically  Independent — 
Revolution  in  Bohemia — Revolution  in  the  Austrian  Provinces 
— Revolution  in  Lombardy-Venetia — Italy  renounces  Austrian 
Control — Revolution  in  Germany — The  National  Movement — The 
Parliament  of  Frankfort — The  March  Revolutions  Everywhere 
Triumphant — Austria  Begins  the  Work  of  Restoration — Bohemia 
Conquered — Italy  Partially  Conquered — Civil  Dissension  Within 
Hungary — The  Croatians  Rise  Against  the  Magj'ars — Austria 
Exploits  the  Situation — Radical  Party  in  Hungary  Seizes  Control 
— Abdication  of  the  Emperor  of  Austria — Accession  of  Francis 
Joseph  I — Hungary  Declares  Francis  Joseph  a  Usurper — War 
Between  Austria  and  Hungary — Hungarian  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence, April  14,  1849 — Hungary  Conquered — The  Conquest 
of  Italy  Completed — Abdication  of  Charles  Albert — Overthrow 
of  the  Roman  Republic — Fall  of  Venice — The  Parliament  of 
Frankfort — Leadership  in  Germany  Oifered  to  the  King  of 
Prussia — Rejection  of  the  Work  of  the  Frankfort  Parliament — 
The  "  Humiliation  of  Olmiitz  " — Results  of  the  Revolutions  of 
1848 169 

CHAPTER  IX 

THE    SECOND    REPUBLIC    AND    THE    FOUNDING    OF 
THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 

The  French  Revolution  of  1848 — Stages  in  the  History  of  the 
Second  Republic — Two  Elements  in  the  Provisional  Government — 


CONTENTS  xiil 

PAGE 

The  Republicans — The  Socialists — Louis  Blanc's  Theories — 
Achievements  of  the  Provisional  Government — The  Question  of 
the  Flag — The  Labor  Commission — Its  Impotence — The  National 
Worlishops — Their  Rapid  Growth — The  National  Constituent  As- 
sembly— The  Assembly  Hostile  to  the  Socialists — Abolition  of 
the  National  Workshops — The  June  Days — A  Military  Dictator- 
ship— Growing  Opposition  to  the  Republic — An  Unpopular  Fi- 
nancial Measure— The  Framing  of  the  Constitution — The  Powers 
of  the  Executive — Discussion  Concerning  the  Presidency — The 
President  to  be  Chosen  by  Universal  Suffrage — The  Voters  to  be 
Untrammeled  in  Their  Choice — Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte's 
Opportunity — His  Previous  Career — A  Member  of  the  Constit- 
uent Assembly — A  Candidate  for  the  Presidency — Causes  of  His 
Triumph — Louis  Napoleon  Elected  President,  Dec.  10,  1848 — 
The  Legislative  Assembly — President  and  Assembly  Opposed  to 
the  Constitution — They  Combine  to  Crush  the  Republicans — The 
Franchise  Law  of  1850 — President  Demands  the  Revision  of  the 
Constitution— The  Coup  d'Etat— Events  of  December  2d— The 
"Massacre  of  the  Boulevards" — The  Plebiscite — Napoleon  HI, 
Emperor,  Dec.  2,  1852 — The  Programme  of  the  New  Emperor — 
The  Political  Institutions  of  the  Empire — Parliament  Carefully 
Muffled — Its  Legislative  Power  Limited — The  Senate — The  Coun- 
cil of  State — The  Emperor — The  Press  Shackled — The  Empire 
Both  Repressive  and  Progressive — The  Emperor's  Activities — 
Economic  Development — Paris  Beautified — General  Prosperity 
— The  Congress  of  Paris,  1856 — The  Emperor's  Policy  of  Peace 
—The   Italian   War   of   1859 187 


CHAPTER  X 

CAVOUR  AND  THE  CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF 

ITALY 

Reaction  in  Italy  After  1848 — Victor  Emmanuel  II — Piedmont  a 
Constitutional  State — Count  Cavour — His  Interest  in  Political 
and  Economic  Questions — Becomes  an  Editor — Cavour  Prime 
Minister,  1852 — Policy  of  Economic  Development — Cavour  Seeks 
a  Military  Ally — Why  Piedmont  Participated  in  the  Crimean 
War — Cavour  at  the  Congress  of  Paris — Discussion  of  the  Italian 
Question — Moral  Victory  for  Cavour — Army  Strengthened — 
Founding  of  the  National  Society — Cavour  and  Napoleon — The 
Interview  of  Plombi^res — A  Conspiracy  to  Bring  About  a  War — 
The  Conditions  Agreed  upon — Difficulties  and  Dangers  of 
Cavour's  Position — Cavour's  Diplomacy — The  Austro-Sardinian 
War — The  Campaign  of  1859 — The  Preliminaries  of  Villafranca 
— Reasons  for  Napoleon's  Action — Austria  Eager  for  Peace — 
Resignation  of  Cavour — Piedmont  Acquires  Lombardy — Central 
Italy — Impossibility  of  Restoring  the  Old  Order — England's  Par- 
ticipation in  Affairs — Cavour  Returns  to  OflBce — Annexations  to 
Piedmont— Cession  of  Savoy  and  Nice  by  the  Treaty  of  Turin, 
March  24,  1860— Effect  upon  Napoleon  III— The  Sicilian  Insur- 
rection— Giuseppe  Garibaldi — The  Defense  of  Rome — Leader  of 
"  The  Hunters  of  the  Alps  " — Determines  to  go  to  Sicily — Cavour's 
Dilemma— The  Expedition  of  "  The  Thousand  "—Conquest  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Naples — Garibaldi  Plans  to  Attack   Rome — Inter- 


V  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

vention  of  Piedmont — The  Annexation  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Naples  and  of  l^mbria  and  the  Marches — Siege  of  Gaeta — The 
Kingdom  of  Italy  Proclaimed — The  Kingdom  Still  Incomplete — 
The  Question  of  Rome — Death  of  Cavour 215 


CHAPTER  XI 

BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 

Reaction  in  Germany  After  1849 — Prussia  a  Constitutional  but  not 
a  Parliamentary  State — The  Police  System — Control  of  the 
Press — The  Privileged  Class — Economic  Transformation — Indus- 
trial Development — Rise  of  a  Wealthy  Middle  Class — Intellec- 
tual Activity— Influence  of  Events  in  Italy  upon  German 
Thought — The  National  Union — William  I — The  Prussian  Array 
— The  Obligatory  Service  not  Enforced — Army  Reform — Op- 
position of  the  Chamber — Determination  of  William  I — Otto  von 
Bismarck-Schonhausen — Bismarck's  Previous  Career — Bismarck's 
Political  Opinions — His  Attitude  Toward  Parliamentary  Institu- 
tions— His  Hatred  of  Democracy — Bismarck  in  the  Diet — The 
Period  of  Conflict — Army  Reform  Carried  Through — "  Blood 
and  Iron "  Policy — Prussia's  Three  Wars — The  Schleswig- 
Holstein  Question — Action  of  Denmark  Concerning  Schleswig 
— Bismarck's  Handling  of  the  Question — Prussia  and  Austria 
at  War  with  Denmark — Treaty  of  Vienna,  Oct.  1864 — The 
Future  of  the  Duchies — Friction  Between  Prussia  and  Aus- 
tria— Prussia  Acquires  Lauenburg  by  Purchase — The  Meeting 
at  Biarritz — Treaty  of  Alliance  with  Italy — Bismarck  Pre- 
pares for  a  War  with  Austria — Bismarck  Proposes  a  Reform 
of  the  Confederation — Prussia  Withdraws  from  the  Confedera- 
tion— The  Austro-Prussian  War — Hellmuth  von  Moltke — Prussia 
Conquers  North  Germany — The  Battle  of  Koniggratz  or  Sadowa 
— Causes  of  Austria's  Defeat — Results  of  the  Austro-Prussian 
War — Annexations  to  Prussia — The  North  German  Confedera- 
tion, 1867-1871— The  Bundesrath— The  Reichstag— Alliance  with 
South  German  States — Consolidating  the  New  System   .        ,        ,  240 

CHAPTER  XII 

THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 

Disastrous  Effect  of  the  Italian  War  upon  Napoleon  III — The 
War  Approved  only  by  the  Democratic  Party — Napoleon's  Va- 
cillation— England  Offended — Treaty  of  Commerce  Offends 
Protectionists — Napoleon  Turns  to  the  Liberals — Powers  of  Par- 
liament Increased — Revival  of  Interest  in  Politics — Rise  of  a 
Republican  Party — The  Mexican  Expedition — Napoleon's  Pur- 
poses— Napoleon  Overthrows  the  Mexican  Republic — Disastrous 
Outcome  of  this  Adventure — Intervention  of  the  United  States — 
Discomfiture  of  Napoleon  III — Additional  Concessions  to  Liberal- 
ism— The  Right  of  Interpellation  Granted — Dramatic  Emergence 
of  Leon  Gambetta — Bitter  Attacks  upon  Napoleon  III — The 
Third  Party — The  Transformation  of  the  Empire  Completed — 
Popular  Approval— The  Plebiscite  of  May,  1870— Sudden  Col- 
lapse of  the  Empire 272 


CONTENTS  XV 

CHAPTER  XIII 

PAOB 

THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

Napoleon's  Unwise  Adherence  to  His  Doctrine  of  Nationalities — 
The  Meeting  at  Biarritz — Napoleon's  Failure  to  Use  His  Oppor- 
tunity in  18GG — The  Year  1866  a  Turning  Point  in  Modern  His- 
tory— "  Revenge  for  Sadowa  "—Failure  of  Napoleon's  Diplo- 
macy— Bismarck  Regards  a  War  with  France  as  Inevitable — The 
Spanish  Candidacy  of  Leopold  of  Hohenzollern — The  Candidacy 
Withdrawn — Folly  of  the  Duke  of  Gramont — The  Ems  Despatch 
— The  War  Party  in  Paris — France  Declares  War  upon  Prussia 
— South  German  States  Join  Prussia — France  Isolated — The 
French  Army — The  Numerical  Inferiority  of  the  French — The 
Germans  Invade  France — The  Battle  of  Sedan — The  Fall  of  the 
Empire — The  Government  of  National  Defense — The  Fall  of 
Mctz — The  Siege  of  Paris — Election  of  a  National  Assembly — 
Thiers  Chosen  Chief  of  the  Executive — Treaty  of  Frankfort — 
Fall  of  the  Temporal  Power — Completion  of  Italian  Unification 
— Completion  of  German   Unification 285 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

Growth  of  National  Feeling  in  Germany  Since  1815 — Constitution 
of  the  New  German  Empire — The  Emperor — The  Bundesrath — 
The  Reichstag — A  Confederation  of  Monarchical  States — Reign 
of  Emperor  William  I — Bismarck's  Commanding  Position — A 
Religious  Conflict — Causes  of  tlie  Kulturkampf — Formation  of 
the  Center  Party— Dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility— The  Old 
Catholics— The  Falk  Laws— Conflict  of  Church  and"  State— Bis- 
marck's Retreat — Financial  and  Industrial  Questions^-Adoption 
of  the  Policy  of  Protection — Its  Advantage  Proved  by  the  His- 
tory of  Other  Nations — Germany  Should  Imitate  the  United 
States— The  System  Gradually  Applied— The  Growth  of  Social- 
ism— Alarm  of  the  Ruling  Classes — Attempts  upon  the  Life  of 
the  Emperor — Severe  INIeasures  Against  the  Socialists — Their 
Failure — Continued  Growth  of  the  Socialist  Party — The  Imperial 
Government  Undertakes  Social  Reform — Various  Forms  of  In- 
surance Proposed — State  Socialism — Tiie  Measures  Carried — Bis- 
marck a  Pioneer — Not  Supported  by  the  Socialists — The  Begin- 
ning of  a  Colonial  Empire — A  Result  of  the  Adoption  of  the 
Policy  of  Protection — Energetic  Intervention  in  Africa — The 
German  Colonies — The  Triple  Alliance — Isolation  of  France — 
Austro-German  Treaty  of  1879 — Entrance  of  Italy  into  the 
Alliance — Death  of  William  I — Accession  of  William  II — The 
Resignation  of  Bismarck — The  Anti-Socialist  Policy  Abandoned 
— Remarkable  Expansion  of  German  Industry — Germany  a 
Naval  Power — Continued  Growth  of  Socialism — The  Social 
Democratic  Party  Numerically  the  Largest — The  Demand  for 
Electoral  Reform — The  Demand  for  Parliamentary  Reform — 
The  Demand  for  Ministerial  Responsibility — The  Present  Situa- 
tion       303 


xvi  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  XV 

PAGE 

FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

The  National  Assembly — Paris  and  the  Assembly  Mutually  Sus- 
picious— Versailles  Declared  the  Capital — Distress  of  the  Work- 
ing Classes — Revolutionary  Elements — The  Idea  of  the  Commune 
— The  National  Guard — The  Government  of  the  Commune — The 
Commune  and  the  National  Assembly  Clash — The  Second  Siege  of 
Paris — The  "  Bloodj^  Week  " — The  Government's  Revenge — 
France  at  Peace — The  Government  of  Thiers — The  Rivet  Law — 
The  Cost  of  the  "  Terrible  Year  "—The  Liberation  of  the  Terri- 
tory— Reform  in  Local  Government — Army  Reform — The  Ques- 
tion of  the  Permanent  Form  of  Government — Thiers  and  the 
Republic — The  Monarchist  Parties — Resignation  of  Thiers — The 
Count  of  Chambord — Estal)lishment  of  the  Septennate — Assembly 
Reluctant  to  Frame  a  Constitution — The  Assembly  Active 
Against  Republicans — Growth  of  the  Republican  Party — -The 
Constitution  of  1875— The  Senate— The  President— The  Ministry 
— France  a  Parliamentary  Republic — Dissolution  of  the  National 
Assembly — The  Republic  and  the  Church — MacMahon's  Con- 
ception of  the  Presidency — Victory  of  the  Republicans — Resigna- 
tion of  MacINIahon — Grevy  Chosen  President — Republican  Legis- 
lation— Creation  of  a  National  System  of  Education — Public 
Works — Revision  of  the  Constitution — Colonial  Policy — Increase 
of  the  National  Debt — Death  of  Gambetta — Discontent  with  the 
Republic — Boulanger — The  Republic  Weathers  the  Crisis — The 
Dual  Alliance — The  Dreyfus  Case — Dreyfus  Degraded  and  Im- 
prisoned— Picquart — Zola  Attempts  to  Reopen  the  Case — Speech 
of  Cavaignac,  Minister  of  War — Court  of  Cassation  Orders  a  Re- 
trial of  Dreyfus — Dreyfus  Again  Declared  Guilty — Dreyfus 
Pardoned — Dreyfus  Vindicated — Significance  of  the  Case — ■ 
Formation  of  the  "  Bloc " — Question  of  Church  and  State- 
Growth  of  Religious  Orders — The  Law  of  Associations — Reli- 
gious Orders  Forbidden  to  Engage  in  Teaching — The  Concordat 
of  1801 — Anti-clerical  Legislation — The  Clergy  in  the  Dreyfus 
Affair — The  Abrogation  of  the  Concordat — Associations  of  Wor- 
ship— Opposition  of  Pius  X — Law  of  Jan.  2,  1907 — Separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State — The  French  Colonial  Empire — Algeria 
— Other  African  Conquests — Cochin-China— Expansion  Under  the 
the  Third  Republic — Western  Africa — Madagascar  ....  329 

CHAPTER  XVI 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

Difficulties  Confronting  the  New  Kingdom — Piedmont  Alone  Ac- 
customed to  Constitutional  Government — The  Constitution— The 
Question  of  the  Papacy — The  Law  of  Papal  Guarantees — The 
Curia  Romana — The  "  Prisoner  of  the  Vatican  " — Death  of  Vic- 
tor Emmanuel  II^The  Educational  Problem — Extension  of  the 
Suffrage— The  Triple  Alliance — Francesco  Crispi — Ambitious 
Military  and  Colonial  Policy — The  Resultant  Distress — Policy  of 
Repression — War  with  Abyssinia — Assassination  of  Humbert  I 
— Victor  Emmanuel  III — Industrial  Expansion^Advent  of  the 
Age  of  Electricity — Increase  of  the  Population — Problem  of 
Emigration — Italia  Rediviva! 376 


CONTENTS  xvii 

CHAPTER  XVII 

PAGE 

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 

Austria's  Punishment  of  Hungary — Failure  of  the  War  in  Italy — 
Francis  Joseph  Reverses  His  Policy — Federalism  or  Centraliza- 
tion?— Austria  Becomes  a  Constitutional  State — Hungary  Re- 
fuses to  Co-operate — Reasons  for  Her  Refusal — The  Hungarians 
Assert  Their  "  Historic  Rights  "■ — And  Demand  the  Restoration 
of  Their  Constitution — A  Deadlock — Francis  Joseph  Yields — 
The  Compromise  of  1867 — The  Dual  Monarchy — The  Delega- 
tions— The  Compromise  Satisfactory  Only  to  the  Dominant 
Races — Constitution  of  Austria — Constitution  of  Hungary — 
The  Dominant  Races — Divisive  Effect  of  the  Principle 
of  Nationality  in  Austria-Hungary — Austria  Since  1867 
— Liberal  Legislation — Demands  of  the  Czechs — The  Em- 
peror Prepares  to  Concede  Them — Opposition  of  Germans 
and  Magyars— Triumph  of  Dualism — Electoral  Reform — The 
Taaffe  Ministry — The  Slavs  Favored — Growth  of  Radical  Parties 
— Division  Among  the  Czechs — Electoral  Reform — Universal 
Suffrage — Hungary  Since  1867 — The  Magyars — The  Croatians — 
The  Policy  of  Magjarization — Race  Questions — Struggle  over  the 
Question  of  Language — Territorial  Gains  and  Losses   .       .       .  388 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

England  in  1815— The  Industrial  Revolution — A  New  Motive  Force 
— The  Steam  Engine — The  Industrial  Primacy  of  Great  Britain — 
Advantages  Derived  from  the  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic 
Wars — The  Renown  of  Parliament — England  a  Land  of  the  Old 
Regime— Commanding  Position  of  the  Nobility — The  House  of 
Commons — The  System  of  Representation — The  County  Suffrage 
— Scotland — The  Suffrage  in  Boroughs — Nomination  Boroughs — 
Rotten  Boroughs — Unrepresented  Cities — Bribery — The  Estab- 
lished Church — Dissenters — Abuses  Within  the  Church — The 
People  Neglected — Adam  Smith — Jeremy  Bentham — Effect  of 
The  French  Revolution  upon  England— Economic  Distress  After 
1815 — Lack  of  Employment — The  Demand  for  Reform — William 
Cobbett — Parliamentary  Reform — Popular  Disturbances — Suspen- 
sion of  Habeas  Corpus — The  Massacre  of  Peterloo — The  Six  Acts 
— Death  of  George  III— The  Dawn  of  an  Era  of  Reform — De- 
fiance of  the  Holy  Alliance — Economic  Reforms — Tlie  Penal 
Code — Reformed  by  Sir  Robert  Peel — Religious  Inequality — The 
Religious  Disabilities  of  Dissenters — Repeal  of  the  Test  and 
Corporation  Acts — Catholic  Disabilities — Catholic  Emancipation 
— Daniel  O'Connell — O'Connell  Elected  to  Parliament — Emanci- 
pation Carried — The  Restriction  of  the  Suffrage  in  Ireland — 
Tory  Opposition  to  the  Reform  of  Parliament — Influence  of  the 
French  Revolution  of  1830 — The  Duke  of  Wellington  on  Reform 
— Fall  of  the  Tory  Ministry — The  First  Reform  Bill — Provisions 
— Lord  John  Russell's  Speech — Sir  Robert  Inglis's  Speech — Rep- 
resentation Never  Better — Hunt's  Speech — Sir  Robert  Peel's 
Criticism — Macaulay  on  the  Bill — Ministry  Defeated,  Parliament 
Dissolved — Second  Reform  Bill — Defeated  by  the  House  of  Lords 


xviii  CONTENTS 


— Third  Reform  Bill — The  Bill  Passed — Redistribution  of  Seats 
— The  County  Franchise — The  Borough  Franchise — Not  a  Demo- 
cratic Reform 406 


CHAPTER  XIX 

ENGLAND  BETAVEEN  TWO  GREAT  REFORMS  (1832-1867) 

An  Era  of  Whig  Government — Slavery  in  the  Colonies — Abolition 
of  Slavery — Child  Labor — Previous  Attacks  Upon  the  System — 
The  System  Defended— The  Factory  Act,  1833— The  Decay  of 
Local  Self-government — The  Necessity  for  Reform — Municipal 
Governments  Notoriously  Corrupt — The  Reform  of  Municipal 
Government — Accession  of  Queen  Victoria — Her  Political  Edu- 
cation— Hanover— The  Radicals  and  the  Reform  Bill — The  Radi- 
cals Agitate  for  P'urther  Reform — The  People's  Charter — Char- 
acter of  the  Chartist  Agitation — The  Lack  of  Able  Leadership — 
The  Petition  of  1848 — The  Significance  of  the  Movement — Eng- 
land's Policy  of  Protection — The  Corn  Laws — Huskisson's  Re- 
forms— Sir  Robert  Peel's  Ministry — The  Anti-Corn-Law  League 
— The  Arguments  for  Free  Trade — The  Irish  Famine — Repeal  of 
the  Corn  Laws — Remaining  Protective  Duties  Gradually  Removed 
— Labor  Legislation — Regulation  of  Labor  in  Mines — Factory 
Laws — Morley  on  the  Laljor  Code — Growth  of  Trades-Unions — 
The  Growth  of  Collectivism — Jews  Admitted  to  the  House  of 
Commons — Gladstone  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer — Postal  Sav- 
ings Banks — State  Insurance — Industrial  and  Scientific  Progress 
— The  Demand  for  a  Wider  Sufi'rage — Effect  of  the  Civil  War^ 
Gladstone  Introduces  a  Reform  Bill — The  Bill  Defeated — Re- 
form Carried  by  Disraeli — Provisions  of  the  Bill — Redistribution 
of  Seats 439 


CHAPTER  XX 

ENGLAND  UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

The  Great  Ministry — William  Ewart  Gladstone — Entrance  into 
Parliament — Leader  of  the  I/iberal  Party — Gladstone's  First 
Ministry,  1868-1874 — Dominance  of  Irish  Questions — Ireland 
a  Conquered  Country — The  Agrarian  Question — The  Reli- 
gious Question — The  Political  Question — Catholic  Emancipation 
— The  Repeal  Movement — The  Irish  Famine — Decline  of  the 
Population — The  Fenian  Movement — The  Irish  Church — The 
Tithe  War — Disestablishment  of  the  Irish  Church — System  of 
Land  Tenure — The  Land  Owned  by  a  Few — Tenants-at-will 
— No  Compensation  for  Improvements — Industry  and  Thrift 
Penalized — Misery  of  the  Peasantry — Deeds  of  Violence 
—The  Ulster  System— Land  Act  of  1870— The  Bright  Clauses— 
The  Bill  Denounced  as  Revolutionary — The  Land  Act  a  Disap- 
pointment— Its  Principles  Important — Educational  Reform — 
Church  Schools — The  System  Inadequate — The  Question  Becomes 
Urgent— The  Forster  Education  Act  of  1870— Church  Schools  In- 
corporated in  the  System — Board  Schools  Estal)lished — The  Ques- 
tion of  Religious  Instruction — The  Conscience  Clause — The 
Cowper-Temple  Amendment — Education  Neither  Free,  nor  Com- 


CONTENTS  xix 


pulsory,  nor  Secular — Army  Reform — Introduction  of  Short 
Service — Abolition  of  the  Purchase  System — Civil  Service  Reform 
— The  Universities  Thrown  Open — Introduction  of  the  Ballot — 
Reasons  for  Secret  Voting — Gladstone's  Waning  Popularity — 
The  Irish  University.  Bill — The  Religious  Difficulty — General 
Dissatisfaction  with  the  Bill — Unpopularity  of  Gladstone's  For- 
eign Policy — The  Alabama  Award— The  Elections  of  1874 — The 
Disraeli  Ministry — Imperialism — Importance  of  the  Colonies 
Emphasized — Purchase  of  the  Suez  Canal  Shares — The  Queen 
Proclaimed  Empress  of  India — Re-opening  of  the  Eastern  Ques- 
tion— Fall  of  the  Disraeli  Ministry — The  Second  Gladstone  Min- 
istry, 1880-1885— Failure  of  Land  Act  of  1870— The  Land  Act  of 
1881 — Rents  to  be  Judicially  Determined — Denounced  as  Con- 
fiscation of  Property— The  Reform  Bill  of  1884— The  County 
Franchise  Widened — Redistribution  of  Seats — Single  Member 
Districts — Various  Qualifications   for   Voting 465 

CHAPTER  XXI 

ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 

The  First  Salisbury  Administration — The  Home  Rule  Movement — 
Charles  Stuart  Parnell — Adoption  of  the  Policy  of  Obstruction 
— Gladstone  Unable  to  Pacify  Ireland — The  Third  Gladstone 
Ministry — The  Home  Rulers  Hold  the  Balance  of  Power — Home 
Rule  or  Coercion? — Introduction  of  the  Home  Rule  Bill — Shall 
the  Irish  Sit  in  Westminster? — Land  Purchase  Bill — Opposition 
to  the  Bills — The  Union  in  Danger! — English  Dislike  of  the 
Irish — John  Bright's  Opposition — Disruption  of  the  Liberal 
Party — The  Bill  Defeated — The  Conservatives  Returned  to  Power 
— Tlie  Second  Salisbury  Ministry,  1886-1893— The  Policy  of 
Coercion — Land  Purchase  Act — County  Government  Reformed 
— Social  Legislation — Increase  of  tiie  Navy — The  Fourth  Glad- 
stone Ministry,  1893-1894— The  Second  Home  Rule  Bill— Funda- 
mental Objections — Bitterness  of  the  Opposition — Passed  by  the 
Commons,  Defeated  by  the  Lords — Parish  Councils  Bill — Resig- 
nation of  Gladstone — The  Rosebery  Ministry — The  Con::rvatives 
Returned  to  Power — The  Third  Salisbury  Ministry — War  in 
South  Africa — Irish  Local  Government  Act — Death  of  Queen 
Victoria— Education  Act  of  1903— The  Abolition  of  the  School 
Boards — Decline  of  Illiteracy — The  Liberal  Party  in  Power— Old 
Age  Pensions  Law — An   Irish   University 497 


CHAPTER  XXII 

THE  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

The  Expansion  of  Europe — The  Growth  of  Colonial  Empires — Vast 
Growth  of  the  British  Empire  Since  1815 — Overthrow  of  the 
Mahratta  Confederacy — Annexation  of  the  Punjab — The  Indian 
Mutiny — Change  in  the  Government  of  India — The  Vast  Popula- 
tion of  India — The  Population  not  Homogeneous — Annexation  of 
Burma  and  Baluchistan — American  Colonies — Upper  and  Lower 
Canada — Constitutional  Difficulties  in  Upper  Canada — In  Lower 
Canada — The   Colonists   Desire    Self-government — The    Rebellion 


XX  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

©f  1837 — Lord  Durham's  Report — The  Executive  Irresponsible — 
Durham  Proposes  Ministerial  Responsibility — Durham  Favors 
Federation — Ministerial  Responsibility  Finally  Introduced — 
Founding  of  Dominion  of  Canada,  1867 — British  North  America 
Act — The  Dominion  Parliament — Growth  of  the  Dominion — The 
Canadian  Pacific  Railway — Australia — Early  Explorations — The 
Voyages  of  Captain  Cooli — A  Convict  Colony — Abandoment  ol 
this  System — The  Discovery  of  Gold — The  Six  Australian 
Colonies — Reasons  for  Their  Federation — Creation  of  the  Aus- 
tralian Commonwealth — The  Federal  Parliament — New  Zealand — 
Advanced  Social  Legislation — System  of  Taxation — Old  Age 
Pensions — Africa — England  Acquires  Cape  Colony — Friction 
with  the  Boers — The  Great  Trek — Founding  of  the  Transvaal — 
The  Transvaal  Annexed  to  Great  Britain — Majuba  Hill — Policy 
of  the  Gladstone  Administration — The  Pretoria  Convention — The 
London  Convention — The  Boers  Desire  Unqualified  Independence 
— The  Boers — The  Uitlanders — The  Jameson  Raid — Sir  Alfred 
Milner's  Reports — The  South  African  War — Victory  of  the 
English — Annexation  of  the  Transvaal  and  the  Orange  Free 
State— The  Union  of  South  Africa,  1909— The  Far  Flung  British 
Empire — The  Problem  of  Imperial  Federation — The  Increasing 
Importance  of  the  Question — The  DiflSculties  in  the  Way — The 
Problem  of  Government — Commercial  Union — Colonial  Con- 
ferences— Confederations   Within   the   Empire 518 

CHAPTER  XXIII 

THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 

The  Period  of  Discovery — Situation  in  1815 — The  French  Conquest 
of  Algeria — The  Sources  of  the  Nile — David  Livingstone — Stanley 
— Stanley's  Explorations  of  the  Congo — Africa  Appropriated  by 
Europe — The  Congo  Free  State — Its  International  Origin — The 
Berlin  Conference — Leopold  II  and  the  Congo  Free  State — 
Criticism  of  Leopold's  Administration — The  Congo  Free  State 
Made  a  Colony  of  Belgium — Egj-pt — Mehemet  Ali  Founds  a 
Semi-royal  House — Ismail  and  the  Rapid  Growth  of  the  Egyp- 
tian Debt — Intervention  of  England  and  France — Revolt  of 
Arabi  Pasha — English  Expedition  Crushes  the  Insurrec- 
tion— England  Assumes  the  Position  of  "  Adviser " — The 
English  "  Occupation  "■ — Loss  of  the  Soudan — Death  of  Gordon 
— Recovery  of  the  Soudan 550 

CHAPTER  XXIV 

SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL  SINCE  1823 

Spain — Revenge  of  Ferdinand  VII  after  1823 — "  Subversive  "  Cries — 
Loss  of  the  American  Colonies — The  Question  of  the  Succession 
— The  Pragmatic  Sanction — Isabella  Proclaimed  Queen — The 
Carlist  War— The  Royal  Statute,  1834— Disturbed  Political  Life 
—The  Constitution  of  1837— Isabella  II  Declared  of  Age— The 
Mexican  Expedition — The  Overthrow  of  Isabella  II — The 
Regency  of  Marshal  Serrano — Amadeo  of  Savoy  Chosen  King — 
Abdication  of  Amadeo — The  Establishment  of  the  Republic — The 


CONTENTS  xxi 


Causes  of  Its  Fall — Alfonso  XII  Recognized  as  King — The 
Constitution  of  1876— Death  of  Alfonso  XII— The  Spanish- 
American  War — Loss  of  Cuba,  I'orto  Rico,  and  the  Philippines 
— Alfonso  XIII  Assumes  Power — Portugal — Flight  of  the  Royal 
Family  to  Brazil,  1807 — Portuguese  Revolution  of  1830 — Loss 
of  Brazil — Donna  Maria  da  Gloria — Death  of  Maria — Recent 
Events  in  Portugal 564 

CHAPTER  XXV 

HOLLAND  AND  BELGIUM  SINCE  1830 

Holland— The  Fundamental  Law  of  1815— The  Constitution  of  1848 
— Extension  of  the  Franchise — The  Dutch  Colonies — Belgium — 
The  Reign  of  Leopold  I — The  Reign  of  Leopold  II — The  Suf- 
frage— Education 579 

CHAPTER  XXVI 

SWITZERLAND 

The  Constitution  of  1815 — The  Importance  of  the  Cantons — The 
"  Era  of  Regeneration  " — The  Sonderbund — The  Constitution  of 
1848 — The  Federal  Government — Powers  of  the  Federal  and 
Cantonal  Government — The  Chief  Significance  of  Switzerland — 
Important  Contributions  to  Democratic  Government— The 
Landesgemeinde  Cantons — The  Referendum — The  Initiative — 
Spread  of  the  Referendum  and  the  Initiative— Proportional 
Representation — The  Population  of  Switzerland — The  Neu- 
trality of  Switzerland 584 

CHAPTER  XXVII 

THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 

Denmark  Loses  Norway — Consultative  Assemblies — Constitution 
Granted — Schleswig-Holstein — Treaty  of  Vienna — Revision  of 
the  Constitution — Growth  of  Radicalism — Denmark's  Colonies — 
Sweden  and  Norway — The  Constitution  of  Eidsvold — Sweden  and 
Norway  Separate  Nations  Under  the  Same  King — ^The  Reign 
of  Charles  XIII— The  Constitution  of  1866— Friction  Between 
Sweden  and  Norway — Abolition  of  Norwegian  Nobility — Dis- 
solution of  the  Union — Treaty  of  Carlstad — Death  of  Oscar  II — 
Suffrage  in  Norway 592 

CHAPTER  XXVIII 

THE   DISRUPTION   OF   THE   OTTOMAN    EMPIRE    AND 
THE   RISE   OF  THE   BALKAN  STATES 

Decay  of  the  Ottoman  Empire — Turkey  in  Process  of  Dismember- 
ment— The  Ruling  Class — The  Eastern  Question — Treatment  of 
Subject  Peoples — The  Revolt  of  the  Servians — The  Condition  of 
the  Greeks — Intellectual  Revival — The  Hetairia  Philike — The 
Greek  War  of  Independence — The  Ferocity  of  the  Conflict — Fac- 


xxii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

tional  Quarrels  Among  the  Greeks — Foreign  Intervention — Why 
England  Intervened — Why  Russia  Intervened — Why  France 
Intervened — Treaty  of  London — The  Battle  of  Navarino— War 
Between  Russia  and  Turkey — Creation  of  tlie  Kingdom  of  Greece 
— The  Principalities — Ambitions  of  Nicholas  I — The  Holy  Places 
—War  Between  Russia  and  Turkey — Coalition  Against  Russia — 
Piedmont  Joins  the  Coalition — Invasion  of  the  Crimea — The 
Siege  of  Sebastopol — Fall  of  Sebastopol — Treaty  of  Paris — 
Turkey  Admitted  to  the  European  Concert — Results  of  the 
Crimean  War — Moldavia-Wallachia — The  Roumanians  and  the 
Crimean  War — The  Union  of  the  Principalities — Couza — 
Charles  I  of  Roumania — Reopening  of  the  Eastern  Question — 
The  Insurrection  of  Herzegovina — Accession  of  Abdul  Hamid  II 
— The  Bulgarian  Atrocities — Gladstone's  Denunciation  of  the 
Turks — Servia  and  Montenegro  Declare  War — Russia  Declares 
War — The  Siege  of  Plevna — Treaty  of  San  Stefano — Opposition 
to  the  Treaty — England  Demands  Its  Revision — The  Congress  of 
Berlin — Independence  of  Montenegro,  Servia,  and  Roumania — 
Union  of  the  Two  Bulgarias — Macedonia — Bulgaria  since  1878 — 
Alexander  of  Battenberg — friction  Between  the  Bulgarians  and 
the  Russians — Breach  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin — Servia  Attacks 
Bulgaria,  Nov.  1885 — Abdication  of  Prince  Alexander^ — Ferdi- 
nand of  Saxe-Coburg — Dictatorship  of  Stambuloff — Murder  of 
Stambuloff — Roumania  and  Servia  since  1878 — Roumania  Pro- 
claimed a  Kingdom — Agrarian  Disturbances — Greece  since  1833 
—Reign  of  Otto  I — Overthrow  of  Otto — The  Ionian  Islands — 
Annexation  of  Thessaly — Aspirations  of  the  Balkan  States — 
Revolution  in  Turkej- — The  Young  Turks — Revolution  of  July, 
1908 — Restoration  of  the  Constitution — Apparent  Unanimity  of 
this  Movement — A  Modernized  Turkey — Attitude  of  Foreign 
Powers — Austria-Hungary  Annexes  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina — ■ 
Bulgaria  Declares  Her  Independence — The  Powers  Do  Not 
Prevent  These  Breaches  of  the  Berlin  Treaty — Servia — Opening 
of  the  Turkish  Parliament — The  Counter-revolution  of  April, 
1909 — The  Young  Turks  Regain  Control — Deposition  of  Abdul 
Hamid  II — Accession  of  Mohammed  V 601 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

The  Reign  of  Alexander  I — Russian  Conquests — The  Nobility — The 
Peasantry — Alexander  I — The  Corruption  of  the  Government — 
Poland — Alexander's  Progressive  Domestic  Policy — Liberal  For- 
eign Policy — Alexander  Becomes  Reactionary — Friction  with  the 
Poles — Death  of  Alexander  I — The  Reign  of  Nicholas  I — Sys- 
tematic Repression — The  Police  System — The  Censorship — Safe- 
guards Against  the  Ideas  of  Western  Europe — A  Brilliant 
Native  Literature — Religious  Persecution — The  Evil  of  Serfdom 
— The  Foreign  Policy  of  Nicholas  I — The  Crimean  War— The 
Humiliation  of  Russia— The  Reign  of  Alexander  II — Prevailing 
System  of  Land  Tenure — The  Mir — The  Serfs — Serfdom  Con- 
demned— The  Crown  Serfs — The  Edict  of  Emancipation — The 
Land  Problem — Division  of  the  Land — State  Aid — Disappoint- 
ment of  the  Peasantry — The  Land  Question  not  Solved — 
Establishment  of  the  Zemstvos— Duties  of  the  Zemstvos — Work 


CONTENTS  xxiii 

PAGE 

Accomplished  by  the  Zemstvos — Reform  of  the  Judicial  System 
- — Educational  Reform — End  of  the  Era  of  Reform — 
The  Polish  Insurrection  of  18()3 — The  Aims  of  the  Poles 
— The  Poles  Receive  no  Foreign  Aid — The  Deep-seated  Divisions 
of  the  Poles — Russia  Resolves  to  Crush  the  Polish  Nobility — A 
Policy  of  Russification — Effect  of  Polish  Insurrection  upon  Alex- 
ander II — Alexander's  Policy  Becomes  Retrogressive — Wide- 
spread Disillusionment — Rise  of  Nihilism — Persecution  of  the 
Nihilists — Bakounine — Nihilist  Propaganda — A  Policy  of  Terror- 
ism— Activity  of  the  Police — Attempts  upon  the  Emperor's  Life 
— Alexander  II  and  Loris  Melikoff — Assassination  of  Alex- 
ander II — The  Reign  of  Alexander  III — Rigorous  Policy  of  Re- 
action— Influence  of  Pobyedonostseff — Opposition  to  the  Ideas  of 
Western  Europe — The  Terrorists  Hunted  Down — Persecution  of 
the  Jews — Great  Jewisli  Emigration — Progressive  Features  of 
the  Reign  of  Alexander  III — The  Industrial  Revolution — Sergius 
de  Witte,  Minister  of  Finance — Witte's  Industrial  Policy — Ex- 
tensive Railway  Construction — Rise  of  Labor  Problems — Rise  of 
a  Rich  Bourgeoisie — The  System  of  Privilege  Menaced — Acces- 
sion of  Nicholas  II — Continuance  of  Autocratic  Government — 
Increasing  Disaffection — Wretched  Condition  of  the  Peasantry — 
Persecution  of  the  "  Intellectuals  " — y\ttack  upon  the  Finns — 
Abrogation  of  the  Finnish  Constitution — Despair  of  the  Finns 
— Rise  of  the  Far  Eastern  Question 645 


CHAPTER  XXX 

THE  FAR  EAST 

England,  France,  and  Russia,  in  Asia — Russian  Expansion — Russia 
Seeks  Access  to  the  Sea — Conquest  of  Turkestan — China — The 
Civilization  of  China — The  Government  of  China — Isolation  of 
China — The  Opium  War — The  Treaty  Ports — Entrance  of 
Various  Powers  into  Commercial  Relations — Treaties  of  Tien- 
tsin— Russia  Annexes  the  Maritime  Province — Japan — Descrip- 
tion of  Japan — Japanese  Civilization — The  Mikado — The  Shogun 
— The  Daimios,  the  Samurai — Advent  of  Europeans — Japan 
Adopts  a  Policy  of  Isolation — Commodore  Perry — Policy  of  Iso- 
lation Breaks  Down — Overthrow  of  the  Shogunate — The  Mikado 
Recovers  Power — Rapid  Transformation  of  Japan — Abolition  of 
the  Old  Regime — Adoption  of  European  Institutions — Reform 
in  Education — Japan  Becomes  a  Constitutional  State — Wars 
with  China  and  Russia — Cause  of  the  War  with  China — Treaty 
of  Shimonoseki — Intervention  of  Russia,  France,  and  Germany — 
Japan  Relinquishes  Port  Arthur — Russian  Entrance  into  Man- 
churia— German  Aggression — Russia  Secures  Port  Arthur — The 
"  Boxer  "  Movement — Rescue  of  the  Legations — Japan  Indignant 
and  Apprehensive — Russian  Activity  in  Manchuria — Diplomatic 
Negotiations  Concerning  Manchuria — The  Anglo-Japanese  Treaty 
of  1903 — Japan  Makes  War  upon  Russia — Russo-Japanese  War, 
1904-1905— Siege  of  Port  Arthur— Mukden  Captured  by  the 
Japanese — Destruction  of  the  Russian  Fleet,  May  27th,  1905 — 
The  Treaty  of  Portsmouth — Reaction  of  These  Events  upon 
China — China  in  Process  of  Transformation — China  Promised 
a   Constitution 681 


xxiv  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  XXXI 

PAGE 

RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

Unpopularity  in  Russia  of  the  War  with  Japan — Open  Expression 
of  the  Popular  Discontent — Von  Plehve's  Iron  Regime — Assassi- 
nation of  Von  Plehve — A  Russian  Defense  of  Assassination — 
Nicholas  II  Enters  upon  a  More  Liberal  Path — Demands  of  the 
Liberals— Not  Granted  by  the  Tsar — Widespread  Disorder — The 
Tsar  Announces  His  Intentions— Popular  Dissatisfaction  and 
Continuance  of  Disorder — The  Manifesto  of  August  19,  1905 — 
The  Resort  to  the  General  Strike — The  Manifesto  of  October, 
1903 — The  Popular  Demand  for  a  Constituent  Assembly  Refused 
— The  Government  Makes  Concessions  to  Finland — The  Council 
of  the  Empire — The  "  Organic  Laws  " — Opening  of  the  Duma, 
May  10,  1906 — Demands  of  the  Duma — The  Impotence  of  the 
Duma — The  Duma  Dissolved — Stolypin  Appointed  Chief  Minister 
— The  Viborg  Manifesto — The  Second  Duma— The  .Tsar  Alters 
the  Electoral  System — The  Third  Drnna — The  Autocracy  Asserts 
Its  Supreme  Authority — The  Transformation  of  the  Mir — The 
Restoration  of  the  Liberties  of  Finland— The  Finnish  Parlia- 
ment Altered — Renewed  Troubles  in   Finland 706 

CHAPTER  XXXII 

CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

Literature — Music — Science — The  Age  of  Steam — Rise  of  the  Fac- 
tory System — Steam  Navigation — The  Invention  of  the  Railroad 
— Importance  of  Railroads— Electricity— Standard  of  Living — 
Popular  Discontent — Spread  of  Militarism — Cost  of  Modern 
Instruments  of  War— Nicholas  II  and  the  Limitation  of 
Armaments — The  First  Peace  Conference  at  the  Hague— Ad- 
dress of  M.  de  Staal — Address  of  General  von  SchwarzhoflF — 
Address  of  M.  Bourgeois — Establishment  of  a  Permanent  Court 
of  Arbitration — The  Twentieth  Century  Opens  with  Wars — The 
Second  Peace  Conference  at  the  Hague — Work  of  the  Con- 
ference—Cost of  the  Policy  of  Blood  and  Iron — Significance  of 
the    Peace    Conferences — Arbitration 719 

Bibliography 737 

Index 773 


I 


LIST   OF   MAPS 

PAGE 

Europe  in  1815 Frontispiece 

Distribution  of  Races  in  Austria-Hungary 25 

The  German  Confederation,  1815-1866 31 

Italy,   1815-1859 53 

The  Unification  of  Italy 237 

The  Growth  of  Prussia  Since  1815 267 

The  German  Empire 305 

Colonial  Possessions  of  the  European  Powers  in  1815     .       .       .  523 

Africa.     European  Possessions  in  1884 555 

Africa,  1910 561 

The  Rise  of  the  Balkan  States 625 

Asia 703 

Contemporary  Europe 721 

Colonial  Possessions  of  the   European  Powers  at  the  Present 

Time 733 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

In  March  1814,  the  enemies  of  Napoleon  entered  his  cap- 
ital and  bivouacked  in  triumph  in  the  streets.  The  long 
struggle  was  over  which  had  forced  the  Emperor  back 
step  by  step  from  the  plains  of  Russia  through  Germany, 
and  was  now  sweeping  him  from  France.  Slowly  the  states 
of  Europe  had  come  to  see  that  Napoleonic  domination 
could  be  ended  only  by  a  generous  and  unswerving  co- 
operation. Reading  this  useful  lesson  in  the  defeats  of 
many  fields,  they  had  built  up  the  Great  Coalition,  and 
finally  the  political  system,  fashioned  with  such  a  varied 
display  of  talent  by  the  Emperor  of  the  French,  had  given 
way  beneath  the  impact  of  a  united  and  resolute  Europe. 

But  the  overthrow  of  Napoleon  brought  with  it  one  of  The  over- 
the  most  complicated  and  difficult  problems  ever  presented  *^^o^  *** 
to  statesmen  and  diplomatists.  As  all  the  nations  of 
Europe  had  been  profoundly  affected  by  his  enterprises, 
so  all  were  profoundly  affected  by  his  fall.  For  nearly  a 
quarter  of  a  century  the  Continent  had  been  harried  by 
war,  involving,  directly  or  indirectly,  all  the  powers,  great 
and  small.  During  that  period  boundaries  had  been  changed 
and  changed  again  with  bewildering  rapidity,  old  states 
had  been  destroyed,  or  cut  up,  or  re-fashioned  arbitrarily, 
several  historic  dynasties  had  been  swept  from  their  thrones, 
new  legal  and  social  systems  had  been  established,  largely 
after  French  models,  and  now  the  power  that  had  led  in 
this  vast  transformation  had  been  humbled,  its  sovereign 
forced  to  strike  arms.  The  destruction  of  the  Napoleonic 
regime  must  be  followed  by  the  reconstruction  of  Europe, 
and  it  is  with  this  difficult  work  that  this  history  begins. 


2  THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

This  reconstruction  was  foreshadowed  more  or  less  clearly 
The  Great  in  the  treaties  concluded  with  each  other  by  the  various 
Coalition.  states  as  they  entered  the  Great  Coalition.  Particularly 
important,  however,  were  the  Treaties  of  Paris  and  Vienna, 
to  the  making  of  which  the  powers  now  directed  their 
attention. 

The  first  step,  naturally,  was  to  determine  the  future 
status  of  France.  What  should  be  done  with  this  arch- 
enemy of  Europe,  now  that  the  decision  no  longer  lay  with 
her  but  with  her  conquerors.''  What  should  be  her  future 
government,  how  large  her  territory,  how  severe  her 
punishment  ? 
The  problem      The  question   of  the  government  was  the  first  to   arise, 

^  r    r  and  had  agitated  the  Allies  for  wrecks  before  they  entered 
ernment    of  ,  '^  ,  _  -^ 

France.  Paris.     There  were  several  possible  solutions.     One  was  the 

continuance  of  Napoleon  in  power,  but  only  after  having 
given  sufficient  guarantees  for  good  behavior.  Such  an  out- 
come was  possible  up  to  the  middle  of  March,  when  the 
conditions  were  presented  him  for  the  last  time.  After  he 
rejected  them  the  Allies  determined  to  have  done  with  him 
forever.  There  were  the  alternatives  of  a  Regency  for 
the  little  King  of  Rome,  Napoleon's  son,  or  of  a  successful 
French  general  as  the  new  monarch,  such  as  Bernadotte, 
now  patronized  by  the  Tsar.  Some  proposed  to  leave  the 
whole  matter  to  the  French  people,  others  to  the  determina- 
tion of  the  legislative  chambers  sitting  in  Paris.  But  as 
the  discussion  went  on  it  gradually  became  clearer  and  clearer 
that  it  must  be  either  Napoleon  or  Louis  XVIII,  the  founder 
of  the  new  royal  family  or  the  representative  of  the  old. 
Bernadotte  upon  the  throne  would  mean  an  undue  influence 
of  Russia  in  the  affairs  of  France ;  a  Regency,  an  undue 
influence  of  Austria.  An  appeal  to  the  French  people,  it 
was  said,  would  let  loose  the  Revolution  once  more,  the 
very  thing  to  which  it  was  proposed  to  administer  a  definite 
and  complete  quietus.  Gradually  the  cry  of  the  French 
royalists  in  favor  of  Louis  XVIII,  "  the  legitimate  king  is 


TREATY  OF  PARIS  3 

there,"  to  restore  him  is  imperatively  necessary,  "  all  else 
is  intrigue,"  carried  all  before  it,  and  the  first  step  in  the 
reconstruction  of  Europe  was  taken  by  the  restoration  of 
the  Bourbons  to  the  throne  from  which  they  had  been  ab- 
sent twenty-two  years. 

On  May  30,  1814,  the  Treaty  of  Paris  was  concluded  Treaty  of 
between  the  Allies  on  the  one  hand,  and  France,  under  Louis  ^*"s. 
XVIII,  on  the  other.  The  boundaries  of  France  were  to 
be  those  of  January  1,  1792,  with  slight  additions  to- 
ward the  southeast  in  Savoy  and  in  the  north  and  north- 
east. On  the  other  hand  she  was  to  relinquish  all  her  con- 
quests beyond  that  line,  which  meant  the  extensive  territories 
of  the  Netherlands,  Italy,  and  parts  of  Germany,  contain- 
ing in  all  a  population  of  about  thirty-two  millions.  The 
distribution  of  these  territories  was  to  be  determined  later, 
but  it  was  already  decided  in  principle,  and  so  stated  in 
the  treaty,  that  the  Netherlands  should  form  a  single  state 
by  the  addition  of  the  Belgian  provinces  to  Holland,  that 
Lombardy  and  Venetia  should  go  to  Austria,  that  the  Re- 
public of  Genoa  should  be  incorporated  in  Sardinia,  that 
the  states  of  Germany  should  be  united  in  a  federation,  that 
England  should  keep  Malta  and  certain  French  colonies, 
returning  others,  that  the  German  territories  on  the  left 
bank  of  the  Rhine,  united  to  France  since  1792,  should  be 
used  for  the  enlargement  of  Holland,  and  as  compensation 
to  Prussia  and  other  German  states,  and  that  Italy,  out- 
side those  regions  that  were  to  go  to  Austria,  should  be 
"  composed  of  sovereign  states."  The  definite  elaboration 
of  these  intentions  of  the  Allies  was  to  be  the  work  of  a 
general  international  congress  to  be  held,  later  in  the  year, 
in  Vienna. 

The  Congress  of  Vienna  (September  1814-June  1815)  was  Congress   of 
one   of   the   most   important   diplomatic   gatherings   in   the  ^^®^^^' 
history  of  Europe,  by  reason  of  the  number,  variety,  and 
gravity     of    the    questions     presented     and     settled.     The 
worldly  brilliancy  of  its  membership  was  remarkable  even 


4  THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

for  an  age  accustomed  to  the  theatrical  diplomacy  of 
Napoleon.  There  had  rarely  been  seen  before  such  an  assem- 
blage as  gathered  in  Vienna  in  the  autumn  of  1814.  There 
were  the  emperors  of  Austria  and  Russia,  the  kings  of 
Prussia,  Bavaria,  Wiirtemberg,  Denmark,  a  multitude  of 
lesser  princes,  and  all  the  diplomats  of  Europe,  of  whom 
Metternich  and  Talleyrand  were  the  most  conspicuous.  All 
the  powers  were  represented  except  Turkey.  So  brilliant  an 
array  merited  consideration,  and  partly  because  men  needed 
relaxation  after  the  tense  and  desperate  years  through  which 
they  had  just  passed,  and  partly  to  oil  the  wheels  of  diplo- 
macy, the  court  of  Austria  was  most  profuse  and  ingenious  ii\ 
its  entertainment.  Gaiety  was  the  order  of  the  day.  It  has 
been  estimated  that  this  Congress  cost  Austria  about  sixteen 
million  dollars,  spent  for  pageantry  and  amusement,  and  this 
when  the  state  was  virtually  bankrupt. 

Slowly  the  work  for  which  these  men  had  come  together 
was  accomplished.  The  Congress  of  Vienna  was  not  a  con- 
gress in  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the  word.  There  was  nevey 
any  formal  opening  nor  any  general  exchange  of  cieden- 
tials.  The  representatives  of  the  powers  did  not  assemble 
day  after  day  and  deliberate  upon  the  many  problems  press- 
ing for  solution.  There  were  no  general  sessions  of  all  the 
powers.  A  large  number  of  treaties  were  made  between  the 
various  states  and  these  were  brought  together  in  their  es- 
sential features  in  the  so-called  Final  Act  of  June  9,  1815, 
a  kind  of  codification  of  the  work  of  the  Congress.  Every- 
thing was  arranged  outside  in  special  committees,  and 
in  the  intimate  interviews  of  sovereigns  and  diplomats. 
The  ifreat  Particularly  important  were  the  agreements  of  the  Great 
Powers.  Powers  with  each  other,  Russia,  Prussia,  Austria,  and  Eng- 
land, the  Allies  who  had  conquered  Napoleon,  for  their  de- 
cisions were  the  main  work  of  the  Congress,  and  were  forced 
upon  the  lesser  states,  which  were  simply  expected  to  ac- 
cept what  they  could  not  themselves  arrange.  The  dramatic 
interest  of  the  Congress  lies  in  the  fact  that  these  Great 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  5 

Powers  were  not  in  harmony  with  each  other,  that  their 
interests  at  times  were  so  divergent,  their  ambitions  so  in- 
tense and  conflicting,  that  at  one  moment  war  seemed  likely 
to  be  the  outcome  of  this  meeting  called  to  give  peace  to 
Europe. 

By  the  first  Treaty  of  Paris  of  May  30,   1814,  France  The  division 

had  renounced  all  rights  of  sovereignty  and  protection  over      . 

spoils, 
thirty-two  millions  of  people.  The  diplomats  of  Vienna  re- 
served the  right  to  distribute  these  millions  as  they  saw  fit. 
This  was  the  main  work  of  the  Congress  as  it  was  also  the 
one  which  occasioned  the  greatest  discord.  The  division  of 
the  spoils  was  a  troublesome  affair.  The  territories  which 
France  had  renounced  were  widely  scattered.  They  included 
what  are  now  Belgium,  certain  Swiss  cantons,  large  parts 
of  Italy,  extensive  regions  of  Germany  on  both  sides  of  the 
Rhine,  and  the  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  a  creation  of  Napoleon 
out  of  former  Poland.  In  addition  to  these.  Saxony,  an 
independent  kingdom,  which  had  remained  faithful  to 
Napoleon  when  the  other  German  states  had  turned  against 
him,  and  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  of  which  Napoleon's 
brother-in-law,  Murat,  was  still  sovereign,  were  also  con- 
sidered properly  at  the  disposal  of  the  powers,  by  reason 
of  their  connection  with  the  fallen  star. 

Certain    questions    had   been    decided    in    principle   in   the 
first  Treaty  of  Paris,  and  needed  now  but  to  be  carried  out. 
The  King  of  Piedmont,  a  refugee  in  his  island  of  Sardinia 
during  Napoleon's   reign,  was   restored  to   his   throne,   and 
Genoa   was    given   him    that   thus    the   state  which   borders 
France    on    the   southeast   mlffht   be   the   stronger   to    resist 
French  aggression.     Belgium,  hitherto  an  Austrian  posses- 
sion, was  annexed  to  Holland  and  to  the  House  of  Orange, 
now   restored,    that   this    state    might    be    a   barrier   in    the 
north.     It  was  understood  that,  In  general,  the  doctrine  of  Principle 
legitimacy  should  be  followed  In  determining  the  re-arrange-  ^^  legit- 
ment  of  Europe,  that  is,  the  principle  that  princes  deprived  ^™^ 
of  their  thrones  and  driven  from  their  states  by  Napoleon 


6  THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

should  receive  them  back  again  at  tlie  hands  of  collective 
Europe,  thougli  this  principle  was  ignored  whenever  it  so 
suited  the  interests  of  the  Great  Powers.  Thus  many  of 
the  German  and  Italian  princes  recovered  their  authority. 
But  in  the  deteraiination  of  the  legitimacy  of  a  govern- 
ment great  elasticity  prevailed.  In  general,  those  states 
which  in  Germany  had  been  destroyed  before  1803,  and  in 
Italy  before  1798,  were  not  restored.  This  alone  meant 
that  the  map  of  Europe  was  far  more  simple  than  at  the 
outbreak  of  the  French  Revolution. 
Demands  of  The  Allies  who  had,  after  immense  effort  and  sacrifice, 
Russia.  overthrown  Napoleon,  felt  that  they  should  have  their  re- 

ward. The  most  powerful  monarch  at  Vienna  was  Alex- 
ander I,  Emperor  of  Russia,  who,  ever  since  Napoleon's 
disastrous  invasion  of  Russia,  had  loomed  large  as  a  lib- 
erator of  Europe.  He  now  demanded  that  the  Grand  Duchy 
of  Warsaw,  whose  government  fell  with  Napoleon,  be  given 
to  him.  This  state  had  been  created  out  of  Polish  terri- 
tories which  Prussia  and  Austria  had  seized  in  the  partitions 
of  that  country  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
Alexander  wished  to  unite  them  with  a  part  of  Poland  that 
had  fallen  to  Russia,  thus  largely  to  restore  the  old  Polish 
kingdom  and  nationality  to  which  he  intended  to  give  a 
parliament  and  a  constitution.  There  was  to  be  no  incor- 
poration of  the  restored  kingdom  in  Russia,  but  the  Russian 
emperor  should  be  king  of  Poland.  The  union  was  to  be 
merely  personal. 
Demands  of  Prussia  was  willing  to  give  up  her  Polish  provinces  if 
Prussia.  Q^]y.  gjjg  could  be  indemnified  elsewhere.  She  therefore 
fixed  her  attention  upon  the  rich  Kingdom  of  Saxony  to 
the  south,  with  the  important  cities  of  Dresden  and  Leipsic, 
as  her  compensation.  To  be  sure  there  was  a  King  of 
Saxony,  and  the  doctrine  of  legitimacy  would  seem  clearly 
to  apply  to  him.  But  he  had  been  faithful  to  his  treaty 
obligations  with  Napoleon  down  to  the  battle  of  Leipsic, 
and  thus,  said  Prussia,  he  had  been  a  traitor  to  Germany, 


THE  CLAIMS  OF  RUSSIA  AND  PRUSSIA        7 

and  his  state  was  lawful  prize.  Prussia  preferred  to  re- 
ceive her  increase  of  territory  in  Saxony  rather  than  in 
the  west  along  the  Rhine,  because  Saxony  was  contiguous. 
She  would  thus  consolidate  and  become  more  compact, 
whereas  any  possession  she  might  acquire  along  the  Rhine 
would  be  cut  off  from  the  rest  of  the  kingdom  by  inter- 
vening states,  and  would  only  render  more  straggling  and 
exposed  her  boundaries,  already  unsatisfactory.  Moreover, 
she  wished  no  common  boundary  with  France,  feeling  that 
she  would  always  be  weak  along  the  Rhine. 

Russia  and  Prussia  supported  each  other's  claims,  the  The  fate  of 
one  to  the  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  the  other  to  the  Kingdom  of  ^°^^°^  ^""^ 
Saxony.  But  Austria  and  England  Avere  opposed  to  the 
demands  of  the  northern  courts,  Austria  not  only  because 
she  was  reluctant  to  give  up  her  own  Polish  territory,  her 
own  part  of  the  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  but  because  she  feared 
the  power  of  Russia,  and  the  growth  of  Prussia  in  north- 
ern and  central  Germany,  England  because  she  desired  to 
prevent  Russia  from  increasing  in  strength,  and  Prussia 
from  threatening  Hanover.  The  Polish  and  Saxon  ques- 
tions, thus  closely  connected  with  each  other,  formed  the  most 
thorny  subject  before  the  Congress,  the  very  pivot  on  which 
everything  turned.  So  heated  did  the  discussion  become 
that  Talleyrand,  utilizing  the  opposition  of  the  Great 
Powers  to  each  other,  succeeded  in  forming  a  secret  al- 
liance between  England,  Austria,  and  France,  to  resist 
these  pretentions  by  arms  if  necessary  (January  1815). 
The  situation  into  which  the  powers  had  come  over  this 
Polish-Saxon  question  was  manifestly  so  full  of  danger  for 
all  concerned  that  they  began  to  recede  from  their  extreme 
positions.  This  prepared  the  way  for  concessions,  but  the 
concessions  were  forced  largely  from  Prussia.  The  oppo- 
sition to  Russia  was  much  less  vehement,  owing  to  her  great 
military  power.  With  three  hundred  thousand  men  ready 
for  action  she  spoke  with  emphasis,  and  moreover,  in  the 
general   state   of  exhaustion,  Europe  had  no  desire  to  go 


8  THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

to  war  on  account  of  Poland.  The  final  decision  was  that 
Russia  should  receive  the  lion's  share  of  the  Duchy  of  War- 
saw, Prussia  retaining  only  the  province  of  Posen,  and 
Cracow  being  erected  into  a  free  city ;  that  the  King  of 
Saxony  should  be  restored  to  his  throne;  that  he  should 
retain  the  important  cities  of  Dresden  and  Leipsic,  but 
should  cede  to  Prussia  about  two-fifths  of  his  kingdom; 
that,  as  further  compensation,  Prussia  should  receive  ex- 
tensive territories  on  both  banks  of  the  Rhine.  Prussia 
also  acquired  Pomcrania  from  Sweden,  thus  rounding  out 
her  coast  line  on  the  Baltic. 
Russian  ac-  Russia  emerged  from  the  Congress  with  a  goodly  number 
of  additions.  She  retained  Finland,  conquered  from 
Sweden  during  the  late  wars,  and  Bessarabia,  snatched  from 
the  Turks ;  also  Turkish  territories  in  the  southeast.  But, 
most  important  of  all,  she  had  now  succeeded  in  gaining  most 
of  the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw.  Russia  now  extended 
farther  westward  into  Europe  than  ever,  and  could 
henceforth  speak  with  greater  weight  in  European 
affairs. 
Austrian  ac-  As  Vienna  was  honored  by  being  chosen  the  seat  of  the 
quisitions.  great  Congress  the  House  of  Hapsburg  profited  greatly  by 
the  arrangements  concluded  there.  Austria  refused  to  take 
back  her  former  possessions  in  southern  Germany  and 
Belgium,  considering  them  too  distant  and  too  difficult  to 
defend,  and  preferring  to  consolidate  her  power  in  south- 
ern and  central  Europe.  She  recovered  her  Polish  posses- 
sions and  received,  as  compensation  for  the  Netherlands, 
northern  Italy,  to  be  henceforth  known  as  the  Lombardo- 
Venetian  Kingdom,  comprising  the  larger  and  richer  part 
of  the  Po  valley.  The  Illyrian  provinces  along  the  eastern 
coast  of  the  Adriatic  were  erected  into  a  kingdom  and  given 
to  her.  This  enlargement  of  her  coast  line  increased  her 
importance  as  a  maritime  power.  She  also  extended  west- 
ward into  the  Tyrol  and  Salzburg,  planting  herself  firmly 
upon  the  Alps.     Thus,  after  twenty  years  of  war,  almost 


ARRANGEMENTS  CONCERNING  ITALY         9 

uninterruptedly  disastrous,  she  emerged  with  considerable 
accessions  of  strength,  and  with  a  population  larger  by 
four  or  five  millions  than  she  had  possessed  in  1792.  She 
had  obtained,  in  lieu  of  remote  and  unprofitable  possessions, 
territories  which  augmented  her  power  in  central  Europe, 
the  immediate  annexation  of  a  part  of  Italy,  and  indirect 
control  over  the  other  Italian  states.  The  policy  followed 
by  Austria  in  the  negotiations  was  indicated  by  Metter- 
nich,  who  said,  "  We  wished  to  establish  our  empire  with- 
out there  being  any  direct  contact  with  France."  This 
was  accomplished. 

England,  the  most  persistent  enemy  of  Napoleon,  the  English  ac- 
builder  of  repeated  coalitions,  the  pay-mistress  of  the  Allies  l^^sitions. 
for  many  years,  found  her  compensation  in  additions  to  her 
colonial  empire.  She  retained  much  that  she  had  con- 
quered from  France  or  from  the  allies  or  dependencies  of 
France,  particularly  Holland.  She  occupied  Heligoland  in 
the  North  Sea,  Malta  and  the  Ionian  Islands  in  the  Mediter- 
ranean ;  Cape  Colony  in  South  Africa ;  Ceylon,  Isle  of 
France,  Demerara,  St.  Lucia,  Tobago,  and  Trinidad.  It 
was  partially  in  view  of  her  colonial  losses  that  Holland 
was  indemnified  by  the  annexation  of  Belgium  on  the  Con- 
tinent, as  already  stated. 

Another  question  of  great  importance,  decided  at  Vienna,  The  future 
was  the  disposition  of  Italy.  The  general  principle  of  ac-  °^  Italy, 
tion  had  already  been  laid  down  in  the  Treaty  of  Paris,  that 
Austria  should  receive  compensation  here  for  the  Nether- 
lands, and  that  the  old  dynasties  should  be  restored.  Aus- 
trian interests  determined  the  territorial  arrangements. 
Austria  took  possession,  as  has  been  said,  of  the  richest  and, 
in  a  military  sense,  the  strongest  provinces,  Lombardy 
and  Venetia,  from  which  position  she  could  easily  dominate 
the  peninsula,  especially  as  the  Duchy  of  Parma  was  given 
to  Marie  Louise,  wife  of  Napoleon,  and  as  princes  con- 
nected with  the  Austrian  imperial  family  were  restored  to 
their  thrones  in  Modena  and  Tuscany.     The  Papal  States 


10 


THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 


Italy  a 
"  geograph- 
ical expres- 
sion." 


Criticism 
of  the 
Congress. 


were  also  re-established.     Austrian  influence  was  henceforth 
substituted  for  French  throughout  the  peninsula. 

No  union  or  federation  of  these  states  was  effected,  as  in 
Germany,  largely  because  Austria  feared  that  she  would 
not  be  allowed  the  presidency  of  two  confederations.  It 
was  Metternich's  desire  that  Italy  should  simply  be  a  col- 
lection of  independent  states,  should  be  only  a  "  geographical 
expression."  The  doctrine  of  legitimacy,  appealed  to  for 
the  restoration  of  dynasties,  was  ignored  by  this  congress 
of  princes  in  the  case  of  republics.  "  Republics  are  no 
longer  fashionable,"  said  the  Tsar  to  a  Genoese  deputation 
which  came  to  protest  against  this  arrangement.  Genoa 
and  Venice  were  handed  over  to  others.  Romilly  mentioned 
in  the  English  House  of  Commons  that  the  Corinthian 
horses  which  Napoleon  had  brought  from  St.  Marks  to 
Paris  were  restored  to  the  Venetians,  but  that  it  was  certainly 
a  strange  act  of  justice  "  to  give  them  back  their  statues, 
but  not  to  restore  to  them  those  far  more  valuable  posses- 
sions, their  territory  and  their  republic,"  wliich  had  been 
wrested  from  them  at  the  same  time. 

Other  changes  in  the  map  of  Europe,  now  made  or  ratified, 
were  these:  Norway  was  taken  from  Denmark  and  joined 
with  Sweden :  Switzerland  was  increased  by  the  addition 
of  three  cantons  which  had  recently  been  incorporated  in 
France,  thus  making  twenty-two  cantons  in  all.  The  fron- 
tiers of  Spain  and  Portugal  were  left  untouched. 

Such  were  the  territorial  re-adjustments  decreed  by  the 
Congress  of  Vienna,  and  which  were  destined  to  endure,  with 
slight  changes,  for  nearly  fifty  years.  It  is  impossible  to  dis- 
cover in  these  negotiations  the  operation  of  any  lofty  prin- 
ciple. Self-interest  is  the  key  to  this  welter  of  bargains 
and  agreements.  Not  that  these  titled  brokers  neglected 
to  attempt  to  convince  Europe  of  the  nobility  of  their 
endeavors.  Great  phrases,  such  as  "  the  reconstruction  of 
the  social  order,"  "  the  regeneration  of  the  political  sys- 
tem of  Europe,"  a  "  durable  peace  based  upon  a  just  di- 


THE  DISAPPOINTMENT  OF  THE  GERMANS      11 

vision  of  power,"  were  used  by  the  diplomats  of  Vienna  in 
order  to  reassure  the  peoples  of  Europe,  and  to  lend  an 
air  of  dignity  and  elevation  to  this  august  assembly,  but 
the  peoples  were  not  deceived.  They  saw  the  unedifying 
scramble  of  the  conquerors  for  the  spoils  of  victory.  No 
ignominy  was  spared  the  people  of  Germany.  The  dip- 
lomats quarreled  over  the  question  whether  some  of  the 
subjects  of  certain  princes,  who  were  not  to  be  restored 
(the  mediatized  princes),  subjects  who  paid  small  taxes, 
were  to  be  reckoned  as  "  whole  souls,"  or  "  half  souls." 
Germans  were  indignant  as  they  saw  themselves  considered  The  indig- 
merelv  as  numbers  and  articles  of  taxation.  A  German  "^  ^^^  ° 
editor  denounced  this  "  heartless  system  of  statistics,  and  Germans, 
glorious  Bliicher  grimly  compared  this  congress  to  the  an- 
nual cattle  fair.  The  doctrine  of  legitimacy  was  one  of 
the  rhetorical  shibboleths,  but,  as  already  said,  it  was  ap- 
plied only  capriciously  as  suited  the  Great  Powers.  Re- 
publics need  not  invoke  it,  and  even  kings  were  curtly  ex- 
cluded from  its  benefits.  Gustavus  IV,  of  Sweden,  de- 
throned, claimed  in  vain  his  restoration.  The  King  of 
Denmark  was  forced  to  acquiesce  in  the  grievous  dismem- 
berment of  his  kingdom.  For  years  the  monarchs  of 
Europe  had  denounced  Napoleon  for  respecting  neither  the 
rights  of  princes  nor  those  of  peoples.  They  now  paid  him 
the  flattery  of  hearty  imitation.  They  ignored  as  cavalierly 
as  he  had  done  the  prescriptive  rights  of  rulers,  whenever  it 
seemed  to  them  advantageous  to  do  so.  The  principle  of 
nationality  which  Napoleon  had  contemned  to  his  own  un- 
doing,   they   treated   with   similar   disdain.      It   was    in   de-  Defiance 

fiance  of  this  principle  that  Austria  was  given  a  command-  ^'^  *"^ 
.  "Drinciplc 

ing    position    in    Italy,    that    Norway    was    handed    from  ^j  nation- 
Denmark,  whose  language  she  spoke,  to  Sweden,   as   com-  ality. 
pensation  for  Finland,  which  the  latter  was  forced  to  re- 
nounce to  Russia,  and  for  Pomerania,  which  she  was  forced 
to  cede  to  Prussia,  that  the  Belgians  were  united  with  the 
Dutch. 


12  THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

Europe  generally  acquiesced  willingly  in  the  work  of 
this  Congress,  ardently  desirous  as  it  was  after  the  long, 
sickening  wars,  for  peace  at  almost  any  price,  and  that  work 
proved  reasonably  durable.  Yet  the  settlement  of  Vienna 
had  pronounced  enemies  from  the  start,  anxious  to  overthrow 
it.  Among  the  disaffected  were  the  French,  who  saw  what 
they  regarded  as  their  natural  boundary  taken  from  them. 
They  alone,  among  the  important  nations,  came  forth  from 
this  international  liquidation  with  no  accessions  of  territory. 
Prussia,  Russia,  Austria,  and  England,  all  received  additions 
and  important  ones.  But  not  so  France,  and  thus  relatively 
to  the  others  France  was  weakened.  For  Frenchmen  these 
treaties  of  1815  were  "  odious,"  and  to  be  torn  up  when 
the  projjitious  time  should  come.  Multitudes,  also,  of  Ger- 
mans and  Italians  Avere  embittered  as  they  saw  their  hopes 
of  unity  and  liberal  government  turn  to  ashes.  The  Bel- 
gians resented  being  handed  about  without  even  being  con- 
sulted. They  rose  in  revolt  in  1830,  and  destroyed  this 
artifice  of  1815.  The  arrangements  concerning  Germany 
and  Italy  were  demolished  in  the  great  decade  of  1860  to 
1870. 
Denuncia-  Though  the  division  of  territories  and  the  determination 

tion  of  the  ^f  |-}^g  j^^g^p  Qf  Europe  constituted  the  main  work  of  the 
'  Congress  of  Vienna,  other  subjects  were  passed  upon  as 
well.  Though  it  did  not  abolish  the  slave  trade,  it  con- 
demned it  in  a  solemn  utterance  "  as  contrary  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  civilization  and  human  right."  It  was  something 
to  have  the  traffic  thus  officially  branded.  The  Congress  also 
established  a  federal  form  of  government  for  Germany, 
which  will  be  described  in  a  succeeding  chapter.  It  adopted 
certain  articles  concerning  the  future  organization  of 
Switzerland.  The  Final  Act,  codifying  the  work  of 
the  Congress  during  its  many  months  of  activity,  was 
signed  June  9,  1815,  a  few  days  only  before  the  battle 
of  Waterloo.  All  the  governments  of  Europe  accepted 
its     provisions,     except     Spain     and     the     Papacy,    whose 


SECOND  TREATY  OF  PARIS  13 

opposition  was  treated  by  the  others  with  easy-going 
indifference. 

While  the  Congress  of  Vienna  was  slowly  elaborating  the  The  "  Hun- 
system  that  should  succeed  the  Napoleonic  on  the  basis  of  Days, 
a  certain  balance  of  power,  Napoleon  escaped  from  Elba, 
made  straight  for  Paris,  seized  the  government  of  France 
from  the  hands  of  the  fleeing  Louis  XVIII,  and  entered  upon 
a  reign  of  a  "  Hundred  Days,"  The  Allies  once  more  forgot 
their  wranglings,  indignantly  gathered  themselves  together 
to  end  this  menace  once  for  all,  and  Waterloo  was  their 
reward.  The  sudden  flash  had,  however,  proved  the  necessity 
of  legislation  supplementary  to  that  of  the  Congress  before 
peace  could  be  considered  secure.  The  first  Treaty  of  Paris 
had  not  proved  a  solid  basis  for  a  reconstructed  Europe.  A 
restored  Bourbon  had  not  been  able  to  keep  his  throne.  Now 
France  must  give  sufficient  bonds  that  in  the  future  she 
would  not  disturb  the  tranquillity  of  the  Continent.  The 
result  was  the  second  Treaty  of  Paris  (November  20,  1815),  Second 

concluded,  like  the  first,  between  Louis  XVIII,  restored  once  "^^^^  ^  ° 

1     1  11-        1  •  Paris, 

more,  and  the  Allies,  but  unlike  the  first,  imposing  heavy 

and  humiliating  burdens  upon  France.  Her  territory  was 
reduced,  involving  a  loss  of  about  half  of  a  million  in- 
habitants, though  it  was  still  larger  than  at  the  outbreak 
of  the  Revolution.  She  was  forced  to  cede  a  number  of 
strategic  posts  on  her  northern  and  eastern  frontier.  She 
was  to  pay  a  war  indemnity  of  700,000,000  francs  and 
eighteen  fortresses  were  to  be  occupied  by  150,000  troops 
of  the  Allies  for  a  maximum  of  five  years,  a  minimum  of 
three,  these  troops  to  be  supported  by  the  French.  It  has 
been  estimated  that  the  total  cost  of  the  "  Hundred  Days  "  to 
France,  resulting  from  these  stipulations  and  certain  addi- 
tional claims  of  the  AlHes,  amounted  in  the  end  to  1,570,000,- 
000  francs,  the  equivalent  in  purchasing  power  of  about 
6,000,000,000  francs  to-day. 

Before  quitting  Paris  in  the  fall   of  this   eventful  year 
of  1815,   the  Allies  signed  two  more  documents  of  great 


14         THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

significance  in  the  future  history  of  Europe,  that  estabHsh- 
The  Holy  ing  the  so-called  Holy  Alliance,  and  that  establishing  the 
Alliance,  Quadruple  Alliance.  The  former  proceeded  from  the  in- 
itiative of  Alexander  I,  of  Russia,  whose  mood  was  now 
deeply  religious  under  the  influence  of  the  tremendous  events 
of  recent  years  and  the  fall  of  Napoleon,  which  to  his 
mind  seemed  the  swift  verdict  of  a  higher  power  in  human 
destinies.  He  himself  had  been  freely  praised  as  the  White 
Angel,  in  contrast  to  the  fallen  Black  Angel,  and  he  had 
been  called  the  Universal  Saviour.  He  now  submitted  a 
document  to  his  immediate  allies,  Prussia  and  Austria,  which 
was  famous  for  a  generation,  and  which  gave  the  popular 
name  to  the  system  of  repression  which  was  for  many  years 
followed  by  the  powers  that  had  conquered  in  the  late 
campaign,  a  document  unique  in  the  history  of  diplomacy. 
Invoking  the  name  of  "  the  very  holy  and  indivisible 
Trinity,"  these  three  monarchs,  "  in  view  of  the  great 
events  which  the  last  three  years  have  brought  to  pass  in 
Europe,  and  in  view,  especially,  of  the  benefits  which  it 
has  pleased  Divine  Providence  to  confer  upon  those  states 
whose  governments  have  placed  their  confidence  and  their 
hope  in  Him  alone,"  having  reached  the  profound  convic- 
tion that  the  policy  of  the  powers,  in  their  mutual  relations, 
ought  to  be  guided  by  the  "  sublime  truths  taught  by  the 
eternal  religion  of  God  our  Saviour "  solemnly  declare 
"  their  unchangeable  determination  to  adopt  no  other  rule 
of  conduct,  either  in  the  government  of  their  respective 
countries,  or  in  their  political  relations  with  other  govern- 
ments than  the  precepts  of  that  holy  religion,  the  precepts 
of  justice,  charity,  and  peace";  solemnly  declare,  also,  that 
those  principles  "  far  from  being  applicable  exclusively  to 
private  life,  ought  on  the  contrary  to  control  the  resolutions 
of  princes,  and  to  guide  their  steps  as  the  sole  means  of 
establishing  human  institutions,  and  of  remedying  their  im- 
perfections." Henceforth,  accordingly,  "  conformably  to 
the  words  of  Holy  Scripture  "  the  three  monarchs  will  con- 


THE  HOLY  ALLIANCE  15 


sider  themselves  as  brothers  and  fellow  citizens,  "  united  by  The  Allies 

the  bonds  of  a  true  and  indissoluble  fraternity,"  and  will  P^^™^^® 

.  aid  to 

lend  "  aid  and  assistance  to  each  other  on  all  occasions  and  each   other. 

in  all  places,  regarding  themselves,  in  their  relations  to 
their  subjects  and  to  their  armies,  as  fathers  of  families." 
Hence,  their  "  sole  principle  of  conduct  "  shall  be  that  "  of 
rendering  mutual  service  and  testifying  by  unceasing  good 
will  the  mutual  affection  with  which  they  should  be  animated. 
Considering  themselves  all  as  members  of  one  great  Chris- 
tian nation,  the  three  allied  princes  look  upon  themselves  as 
delegates  of  Providence  called  upon  to  govern  three  branches 
of  the  same  family,"  namely,  Austria,  Prussia,  and  Russia. 
"  Their  majesties  recommend,  therefore,  to  their  peoples, 
as  the  sole  means  of  enjoying  that  peace  which  springs 
from  a  good  conscience  and  is  alone  enduring,  to  fortify 
themselves  each  day  in  the  principles  and  practice  of  those 
duties  which  the  Divine  Saviour  has  taught  to  men."  "  All 
those  powers  who  wish  solemnly  to  make  avowal  "  of  these 
"  sacred  principles  shall  be  received  into  this  Holy  Alliance 
with  as  much  cordiality  as  affection."  ^ 

This  document,  born  of  the  religious  emotionalism  of  the  Unusual 
Tsar,  has  no  parallel.  Written  in  the  form  of  a  treaty,  it 
imposes  none  of  the  practical  obligations  of  a  treaty,  but  Alliance, 
is  rather  a  confession  of  faith  and  purpose.  Diplomatists 
were  amazed  at  its  unworldly  character.  Ultimately,  nearly 
all  the  powers  of  Europe  signed  it,  more  out  of  com- 
pliment to  the  Tsar  than  from  any  intellectual  sympathy. 
Metternich  pronounced  it  a  "  sonorous  nothing,"  a  "  philan- 
thropic aspiration  clothed  in  a  religious  garb,"  an  "  overflow 
of  the  pietistic  feelings  of  the  Emperor  Alexander " ; 
Castlereagh,  a  "  piece  of  sublime  mysticism  and  nonsense  " ; 
Gentz,  a  bit  of  "  stage  decoration."  Yet  for  a  generation 
this  Holy  Alliance  or  "  diplomatic  apocalypse "  stood  in 
the  mind  of  the  world  as  the  synonym  for  the  regime  of 

'  Extracts  from  University  of  Pennsylvania  Translations  and  Reprints, 
Vol.  I,  No.  3.     Edited  by  J.  H.  Robinson. 


16         THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

absolutism  and  repression  which  prevailed  in  Europe.  But 
that  regime  was  not  the  outcome  of  the  treaty  of  the  Holy 
Alliance,  but  rather  that  of  the  treaty  of  the  Quadruple 
Alliance  concluded  in  the  same  year.  The  former  was  a 
dead  letter  from  the  moment  of  issue,  and  did  not  influence 
the  policy,  either  domestic  or  foreign,  of  any  state.  Its 
author,  Alexander  I,  was,  moreover,  in  1815  a  liberal  in 
politics  who  had  been  largely  instrumental  in  forcing  the 
restored  Bourbon,  Louis  XVIII,  to  grant  a  constitution  to 
France,  and  who  was  himself  about  to  grant  one  to  Poland. 
He  was  certainly  at  this  moment  far  from  thinking  of 
inaugurating  a  system  of  repression.  But  the  latter,  the 
treaty  of  the  Quadruple  Alliance,  became  under  the  manipu- 
lation of  Metternich  a  stern  and  forbidding  reality,  as  we 
shall  see.  The  liberal  newspapers  of  the  Continent  confused 
the  two  treaties,  naturally  enough,  as  Russia,  Austria,  and 
Prussia  were  signatories  of  both,  and  they  came  to  speak 
with  hatred  of  the  Holy  Alliance.  The  name  excepted, 
however,  the  Holy  Alliance  is  much  less  important  than  the 
Quadruple     Quadruple  Alliance  concluded  November  20,  1815. 

.A.1113.71C6 

Napoleon  had  been  overthrown  only  by  collective  Europe, 
bound  together  in  a  great  coalition.  The  episode  of  the 
"  Hundred  Days,"  occurring  while  the  Congress  of  Vienna 
was  laying  the  foundations  of  the  new  Europe,  proved  the 
necessity  of  the  prolongation  of  that  union.  Hence,  there 
appeared  the  "  Concert  of  Powers,"  which  for  the  next  few 
years  is  the  central  fact  in  the  international  affairs  of 
Europe.  In  the  eyes  of  the  victorious  monarchs  there  were 
two  dangers  menacing  the  system  they  were  resolved  to  re- 
store :  France  as  a  military  power ;  and  "  French  ideas," 
the  ideas  of  the  Revolution,  of  the  rights  of  peoples  and 
individuals  which,  operating  upon  the  masses  of  the  differ- 
ent states,  might  lead  them  to  attempt  to  remold  the  dif- 
ferent governments  along  French  lines.  Against  the  first 
danger  ample  precautions  had  been  taken.  France  was 
now  surrounded  by   a  ring  of  states  sufficiently  strong  in 


THE  QUADRUPLE  ALLIANCE  17 

a  military  sense  to  hold  her  in  check  temporarily,  and  to 
prevent  any  such  invasions  of  the  French  as  had  occurred 
during  the  previous  years.  Moreover,  many  of  her  fron- 
tier fortresses  had  been  taken  from  her,  leaving  weak  spots 
in  her  line  of  defense,  particularly  toward  Germany.  She 
had  also  been  forced  to  consent  to  the  occupation  of  her 
territory  for  several  years  by  a  large  army  under  the  com- 
mand of  the  powers  that  had  just  humbled  her.  As  if  this 
were  not  enough,  she  was  herself  to  pay  for  the  support  of 
those  troops,  and  also  to  pay  a  large  indemnity.  It  was 
believed  that  all  this  would  be  sufficient  to  compel  her  to 
keep  the  peace,  that  she  would  have  domestic  problems  severe 
and  exacting  enough  to  absorb  her  entire  attention. 

The  control  or  extinction  of  the  so-called  "  French  Precautions 
ideas "  was  a  more  baffling  and  subtle  problem,  but  one 
which  the  Allies  felt  it  necessary  to  attack.  For  this  pur- 
pose they,  Russia,  Prussia,  Austria,  and  England,  signed 
a  Treaty  of  Alliance  on  November  20,  1815,  engaging  to 
employ  all  their  means  to  prevent  the  general  tranquillity 
from  being  again  disturbed,  binding  themselves  "  to  main- 
tain in  full  vigor,  and  should  it  be  necessary,  with  the  whole 
of  their  forces,"  the  permanent  exclusion  of  Napoleon  and 
his  family  from  the  throne  of  France,  promising  to  con- 
cert necessary  measures  "  in  case  the  same  Revolutionary 
Principles,  which  upheld  the  last  criminal  usurpation," 
should  again,  "  under  other  forms,  convulse  France."  Ex- 
pressing themselves  as  "  uniformly  disposed  to  adopt  every 
salutary  measure  calculated  to  secure  the  tranquillity  of 
Europe  by  maintaining  the  order  of  things  re-established 
in  France,"  they  agreed,  in  order  "  to  consolidate  the  con-  The  Concert 
nections,  which  at  the  present  moment  so  closely  unite  the  ^^  Powers, 
four  Sovereigns  for  the  happiness  of  the  world,"  to  renew 
their  meetings  "  at  fixed  periods,  either  under  the  im- 
mediate auspices  of  the  sovereigns  themselves  or  by  their 
respective  ministers,  for  the  purpose  of  consulting  upon  their 
interests,  or  for  the  consideration  of  the  measures  which. 


18         THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

at  each  of  these  periods,  shall  be  considered  the  most  salu- 
tary for  the  repose  and  prosperity  of  Nations  and  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  Peace  of  Europe."  ^ 

This  was  ^artually  an  assertion  that  the  four  Great  Powers 
would  henceforth  control  Europe  in  the  interests  of  the 
ideas  they  represented.  The  Alliance,  whose  object  had  been 
to  overthrow  Napoleon,  was  to  be  projected  into  the  time 
of  peace.  There  was  thus  started  that  series  of  con- 
gresses which,  for  the  next  eight  years,  exercised  a  rigid 
inquisition  into  the  political  movements  of  Europe,  and  a 
pitiless  repression  of  such  as  appeared  dangerous.  This 
alliance  was  contracted  with  a  view  particularly  to  keeping 
France  harmless.  The  important  provision  is  that  con- 
cerning future  congresses,  and  it  was  the  manipulation  of 
these  congresses  in  the  interest  of  reaction,  the  conversion 
Quadruple  of  this  alliance  into  an  engine  of  universal  repression,  largely 
Alliance  ^y  t}^g  adroit  diplomacy  of  Mettemich,  that  made  the  three 
powers  which  consistently  co-operated,  and  had  first 
signed  the  Treaty  of  the  Holy  Alliance,  Russia,  Prussia, 
and  Austria,  so  odious  to  the  Liberals  of  the  Continent.  In 
1815  this  Quadruple  Alliance  appeared  as  a  warning  only 
to  France,  but  the  first  congress  held  under  the  agreement 
disclosed  a  compact  union  of  the  three  eastern  states  against 
the  spirit  of  reform  everywhere.  England's  policy  rapidly 
diverged,  as  we  shall  see,  from  that  of  her  allies. 

The  fate  of  Europe  in  the  period  after  1815  was  largely 
controlled  by  the  powers  that  had  thus  proclaimed  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Christian  religion  their  favorite  rule  of 
conduct,  yet  the  probable  character  of  their  policy  could 
be  more  accurately  foretold  by  a  study  of  the  character  of 
their  rulers  rather  than  of  the  biblical  principles  to  which 
they  were  amiably  inclined  to  append  their  signatures. 
Each  was   an   absolute  monarch,   recognizing  no  trammels 

*  Quotations  are  from  Treaty  of  Alliance  and  Friendship.  Signed 
Paris,  November  20,  1815.  Hertslet,  Map  of  Europe  by  Treaty,  I, 
S72-375. 


nich. 


THE  MEMBERS  OF  THE  HOLY  ALLIANCE      19 

upon  his  power,  save  such  as  he  himself  might  be  willing 
to  concede.  To  each  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  was  incomprehensible 
and  loathsome.  Each  had  suffered  repeatedly  and  griev- 
ously from  that  Revolution.  Each  was  sure  to  be  its  enemy, 
should  it  break  forth  again.  Yet  there  were  variations. 
The  Emperor  of  Russia,  Alexander  I,  appeared,  in  1815,  the  Alexander  I 
most  powerful  monarch  of  Europe.  Young,  imaginative,  1777-1825. 
impressionable,  he  had  received  in  his  early  education  a 
tincture  of  western  liberalism  which,  in  the  years  immediately 
after  Waterloo,  seemed  likely  to  deepen.  This  at  first  made 
Metternich  regard  him  as  little  less  than  a  Jacobin,  all  the 
more  dangerous  because  crowned.  Yet  he  was  known  as 
changeable,  as  egoistic,  as  influenced  by  fear.  Frederick 
William  III,  King  of  Prussia,  slow,  timid,  conceiving  gov- 
ernment in  a  parental,  patriarchal  sense,  was  a  weak  ruler, 
but  a  ruler  whose  views  were  those  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
who  did  not  see  the  change  that  had  come  over  the  world, 
who  was  disposed  to  plod  along  contentedly  in  the  tradi- 
tional path  of  the  absolute  Prussian  monarchy,  distrusting 
innovations,  deferential  toward  Austria,  The  other  member 
of  the  Holy  Alliance  was  Francis  I,  of  Austria,  the  most  Francis  I 
narrow-minded,  illiberal  of  the  three.  He,  too,  had  learned  °^  Austria, 
nothing  from  the  suggestive  vicissitudes  of  his  career.  His 
mind  was  commonplace,  barren,  even  mean.  The  spirit  of 
his  rule  is  mirrored  in  certain  well-known  utterances :  "  The 
whole  world  is  mad  and  wants  new  constitutions."  "  Keep 
yourselves,"  he  said  to  a  group  of  professors  in  1821,  "  to 
what  is  old,  for  that  is  good ;  if  our  ancestors  have  proved 
it  to  be  good  why  should  not  we  do  as  they  did.''  New  ideas 
are  now  coming  forward  of  which  I  do  not  nor  ever  shall 
approve.  Mistrust  these  ideas  and  keep  to  the  positive. 
I  have  no  need  of  learned  men.  I  want  faithful  subjects.  Be 
such :  that  is  your  duty.  He  who  would  serve  me  must  do  what 
I  command.  He  who  cannot  do  this,  or  who  comes  full  of 
new  ideas,  may  go  his  way.     If  he  does  not  I  shall  send  him." 


20 


THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 


Metternich, 
1773-1859. 


His 

diplomatic 
skill. 


Though  Francis  I  was  a  commonplace  character  he  pos- 
sessed in  his  chief  minister,  Prince  Metternich,  a  man  far  out 
of  the  ordinary,  a  man  who  appeared  to  the  generation 
that  lived  between  1815  and  1848  as  the  most  commanding 
personality  of  Europe,  whose  importance  is  shown  in  the 
phrases,  "  era  of  Metternich,"  "  system  of  Metternich." 
He  was  the  central  figure  not  only  in  Austrian  and  German 
politics,  but  in  European  diplomacy,  dominating  his  age  as 
Napoleon  had  dominated  his,  though  by  a  very  different 
process.  Metternich  was  the  most  famous  statesman  Austria 
produced  in  the  nineteenth  century.  A  man  of  high  rank, 
wealthy,  polished,  he  was  the  prince  of  diplomatists  "  with- 
out a  peer  in  his  age  or  in  his  style,"  says  a  French  his- 
torian and  critic,  "  who  deserved  to  govern  Europe  as  long 
as  Europe  deserved  to  be  governed  by  diplomacy.  In  this 
respect  everything  about  him  is  interesting.  .  .  .  Met- 
ternich remains  by  exterior  grace,  by  the  excellence  of  tone, 
the  perfection  of  attitude,  and  the  subtle  knowledge  of  the 
proprieties,  an  incomparable  master.  The  great  comedy 
of  the  world,  the  high  intriguing  of  the  European  stage, 
has  never  had  so  fertile  an  author,  an  actor  so  consum- 
mate." ^ 

Mettemich's  reputation  was  based  on  his  long  and  tortuous 
diplomatic  duel  with  Napoleon.  Claiming  to  have  correctly 
read  that  bewildering  personality  from  his  earliest  observa- 
tion of  him,  and  to  have  lured  him  slowly  yet  inevitably  to 
his  doom  by  playing  skilfully  upon  his  weaknesses,  Metter- 
nich considered  himself  the  conqueror  of  the  conqueror.  An 
achievement  so  notable  imposed  upon  many,  nor  did  Met- 
ternich do  aught  to  dim  the  brilliancy  of  the  exploit.  His 
imperturbability,  his  prescience,  his  diplomatic  dexterity 
were  everywhere  praised.  He  came  to  be  considered  the 
one  great  oracle,  whose  every  word  was  full  of  meaning,  if 
only  you  could  get  it.  Diplomats  bowed  like  acolytes  be- 
fore this  master  of  their  craft,  and  rulers  also  made  their 


*  Sorei,  Essais  d'Histoire  et  de  Critique,  21-23. 


PRINCE  METTERNICH  21 

obeisance,  though  somewhat  more  slowly,  as  obviously  be- 
fitted those  who  ruled  by  nothing  less  than  divine  right.  A 
few  years  after  1815,  Alexander  I,  of  Russia,  whose  liberal 
vagaries  had  sorely  tried  this  infallible  high  priest,  made  his 
penance.  "  You  are  not  altered,"  he  said,  "  I  am.  You 
have  nothing  to  regret,  but  I  have." 

Metternich  played  this  lofty  role  with  becoming  gravity 
and  grandeur.  His  cynicism,  so  corroding  for  his  contem- 
poraries, never  turned  upon  himself.  Humility  is  hardly 
a  proper  weakness  for  a  primate.  No  adulation  could  equal 
his  own  self-appreciation.  He  speaks  of  himself  as  being  His 
born  "  to  prop  up  the  decaying  structure "  of  European  self-esteem, 
society.  He  feels  the  world  resting  on  his  shoulders.  "  My 
position  has  this  peculiarity,"  he  says,  "  that  all  eyes,  all 
expectations  are  directed  to  precisely  that  point  where  I 
happen  to  be."  He  asks  the  question :  "  Why,  among  so 
many  million  men,  must  I  be  the  one  to  think  when  others 
do  not  think,  to  act  when  others  do  not  act,  and  to  write 
because  others  know  not  how."  Traveling  in  Italy  in  1817, 
he  records :  "  My  presence  in  Italy  produces  an  incalculable 
effect."  Traveling  in  Germany  in  1818,  he  notes:  "I 
came  to  Frankfort  like  the  Messiah."  Elsewhere  he  says: 
"  Happy  is  he  who  can  say  of  himself  that  he  has  never 
strayed  from  the  path  of  eternal  law.  Such  testimony,  my 
conscience  cannot  refuse  me."  This  superb  presumption 
stood  the  test  of  all  experience.  Even  in  1848,  after  the 
revolutions  of  Italy  and  Germany,  the  abdication  of  his 
emperor,  and  his  own  overthrow  and  flight  to  London,  he 
said :     "  My  mind  has  never  entertained  error." 

As  an  historical  figure  Metternich's  importance  consists  His 
in  his  execration  of  the  French  Revolution.  His  life-long  historical 
role  was  that  of  incessant,  lynx-eyed  opposition  to  every- 
thing comprehended  in  the  word.  He  lavished  upon  it  a 
wealth  of  metaphorical  denunciation.  It  was  "  the  disease 
which  must  be  cured,  the  volcano  which  must  be  extin- 
guished, the  gangrene  which  must  be  burned  out  with  the 


22         THE  RECONSTRUCTION  OF  EUROPE 

hot  iron,  the  hydra  with  jaws  open  to  swallow  up  the  social 
order."  He  was  the  sworn  enemy  of  the  Revolution.  He 
had  a  horror  of  parliaments  and  representative  regimes. 
"  France  and  England,"  he  said,  "  may  be  considered  as 
countries  without  a  government."  He  defined  himself  as 
the  man  of  the  status  quo.  His  was  a  doctrine  of  pure 
immobility.  The  new  ideas  ought  never  to  have  come  into 
the  world,  but  the  past  could  not  be  helped.  Prevention  of 
the  further  spread  of  these  new  ideas  was,  he  felt,  the  im- 
perative requirement  of  European  politics.  He  was  the 
minister  of  European  conservatism.  His  strength  lay  in 
the  fact  that  repose  was  the  passionate  desire  of  the  men 
of  1815.  Nothing  seemed  more  fearful  to  Europe  than  a 
recurrence  of  war.  Only  it  was  safe  to  say  that  a  Europe, 
invigorated,  electrified  as  this  had  been,  however  exhausted, 
Doctrine  of  however  desirous  of  rest  for  the  time,  would  not  be  willing 
to  be  forever  quiescent.  The  ideal  of  immobility  as  a 
permanent  thing  is  the  paralysis  of  thought.  Metternich 
failed  in  the  end,  though  for  a  while  Europe  was  blinded 
by  his  success,  because,  while  he  could  imprison  revolution- 
ists, he  could  not  imprison  ideas.  He  failed  to  understand 
the  impalpable  forces  of  his  age. 

Considering  the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna  as 
largely  his,  his  concrete  task  was,  henceforth,  to  consolidate 
that  work,  to  repel  all  attacks  upon  it.  He  saw  only  one  side 
of  the  Revolution,  the  destructive.  The  constructive  side  he 
never  understood.  This,  however,  was  for  the  future  the 
more  important.  A  comprehension  of  it  was  most  essential 
for  a  statesman  who  felt  the  world  resting  on  his  shoulders. 
How  Metternich  worked  out  his  system  will  be  seen  in 
succeeding  chapters.  His  lever  was  Austria.  Austria's 
legal  rights  and  commanding  authority  in  Germany  and 
Italy,  and  his  own  remarkable  powers  of  persuasion,  sug- 
gestion, and  intimidation  were  the  instruments  used  in  the 
erection  of  the  international  fabric  which  took  its  name 
from  him. 


CHAPTER  II 
REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

Austria  emerged  from  the  Napoleonic  wars  stronger, 
larger,  and  more  populous  than  ever.  She  had  been  re- 
peatedly shattered,  her  boundaries  repeatedly  redefined 
during  the  last  twenty  years,  yet  the  result  was  favorable. 
She  had  relinquished  her  possessions  in  the  Netherlands  (mod- 
ern Belgium)  and  some  of  her  southwest  German  lands,  but 
had  been  indemnified  by  lands  in  Germany  and  Italy,  which 
were  contiguous  and  more  advantageous.  At  the  very 
moment  that  her  great  German  rival,  Prussia,  was  becoming 
more  straggling  and  loosely  extended,  Austria  was  attaining 
a  territorial  compactness  she  had  never  known.  Planted 
firmly  upon  the  Alps  and  the  Carpathians,  and  with  an 
extensive  coast  line  along  the  Adriatic,  she  was  admirably 
situated  for  an  assertive  role  in  European  politics. 

The  Austrian  Empire,  however,  presented  to  the  eye  cer-  Lack  of 
tain  peculiarities,   offered  by  no   other   state  in  Europe,   a  ^nity  i"  the 
knowledge  of  which  is  essential  to  an  understanding  of  her  T-mmre 
history   in   the  nineteenth    century.     The   empire   was   con- 
spicuously lacking  in  unity,  political,  racial,  or  social.     It 
was  not  a  single  nation  like  France  but  was  composed  of 
many   nations.      To   the   west   were    the   Austrian    duchies, 
chiefly   German,   the   ancient   possessions   of  the   House   of 
Hapsburg;  to  the  north  Bohemia,  an  ancient  kingdom  ac- 
quired by  the  Hapsburgs  in  1526;  to  the  east  the  Kingdom 
of  Hungary,   occupying  the   immense   plain   of  the   middle 
Danube;  to  the  south  the  Kingdom  of  Lombardy-Venetia, 
purely  Italian.     None  of  these  even  was  a  unit  but  each  was 
composed  of  several  parts.    Bohemia  included,  beside  Bohemia 
proper,  Moravia  and  Silesia ;  Hungary  included  far  to  the 

23 


24      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 


Racial 

differences. 


Not  a 

German 

Empire. 


east  tlic  principality  of  Transylvania,  and  to  the  southwest 
the  Kingdom  of  Croatia.  Many  of  these  constituent  elements 
preserved  special  privileges,  thus  rendering  the  government 
confused  and  unequal. 

More  important  still  was  the  fact  that  this  empire  was  in- 
habited by  many  peoples  which  differed  greatly  in  origin,  in 
language,  in  history,  in  customs  and  institutions.  At  best 
these  racial  and  linguistic  differences  rendered  difficult,  if 
not  impossible,  the  growth  of  a  national  consciousness,  a  com- 
mon patriotism ;  at  the  worst  they  might  become  mutually 
antagonistic  and  tend  to  disrupt  the  empire.  The  two  lead- 
ing races  were  the  Germans,  forming  the  body  of  the  popu- 
lation in  the  Austrian  duchies,  and  the  Magyars,  originally 
an  Asiatic  folk,  encamped  in  the  Danube  valley  since  the 
ninth  century,  and  forming  the  dominant  people  in  Hun- 
gary. Yet  also  in  the  eastern  part  of  Hungary  were  Rou- 
manians, reputed  descendants  of  early  Roman  colonists  and 
speaking  a  language  of  Latin  origin,  and  there  were  Slavic 
peoples  north  and  south  of  the  Gennans  and  Magyars  in 
both  Austria  and  Hungary.  In  this  medley  of  states,  races, 
and  languages  there  lay  numberless  possible  causes  of  di- 
vision and  contention.  They  had  almost  nothing  in  common 
save  allegiance  to  the  emperor  and,  for  most  of  them,  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  If  the  desire  for  a  separate  na- 
tional life  should  spring  up  among  these  varrious  peoples,  the 
Empire  might  be  disrupted,  would  at  any  rate  be  trans- 
formed. In  1815,  however,  there  was  not  the  rivalry  in 
nationality   and  language  that  has  since  become   so  acute. 

This  empire  was  not  a  German  empire,  though  it  had  the 
appearance  of  so  being.  The  Germans  were  the  most  influen- 
tial element,  the  ruling  house  was  German,  Vienna,  the  capi- 
tal, was  a  German  city,  the  German  language  was  used  for 
official  intercourse.  An  attempt  had  been  made  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  under  Joseph  II,  thoroughly  to  German- 
ize the  empire,  but  it  had  completely  and  quickly  failed  and 
it  was  not  likely  to  be  made  again  in  the  nineteenth  century. 


DISTRIBUTION^  OF  RACES 

IX 

AU  STRL\  HUNGAKY 


SnylUh  Allies 


Jta/iafis^ Iodines 
r     :l  RtUhenians  i       I  Aia^j'rtrs. 


POLICY  OF  FRANCIS  I  S5 

as  the  balance  between  the  German  and  the  non-German 
elements  had  been  altered  since,  considerably  in  favor  of  the 
latter.  The  Germans  were  in  a  decided  numerical  minority, 
but  by  reason  of  their  greater  wealth,  intelligence,  and 
general  advancement  they  remained  the  leading  element  in 
the  state.  But  the  nineteenth  century  was  to  see  their 
leadership  contested  and  gradually  weakened  by  the  rise  of 
strong  national  and  race  movements  in  Hungary  and  Bo- 
hemia. The  Slavs  formed  the  majority  of  the  population 
of  the  entire  empire,  but  they  were  not  homogeneous,  were 
geographically  scattered,  were  in  civilization  inferior,  and 
were  for  the  time  quiescent. 

To    rule    so    conglomerate    a    realm    of    twenty-eight    or  Policy   of 
twenty-nine   million  people  was   a  task  of  great   difficulty,  ^^'^^cis 
This  was  the  first  problem  of  Francis  I   (1792-1835)    and  Metternich 
Metternich.     Their  policy  in  the  main  was  to  keep  things 
as  they  were.     To  innovate  was  to  enter  a  lane  that  might 
know  no  turning.     They   made   no  attempt  to   reform   the 
government.     They  allowed  the  various  parts  of  the  political 
machine  to  continue,  lacking  as  it  was  in  symmetry  and  in 
efficiency.     This  machinery  was  both  chaotic  and  unscien- 
tific.    There  was  no  central,  coherent  cabinet,  or  group  of 
ministers.     There  were,  of  course,  various  departments,  but 
some  had  jurisdiction  over  the  whole  empire,  some  only  over 
parts.     In  any  case  the  boundaries  were  not  carefully  de- 
fined.     Government   was    exceedingly    slow,    cumbrous,    dis- 
jointed, inefficient. 

Austria  was  now  the  classic  land  of  the  old  regime.     Her  Austria  a 

boundaries   had  been   repeatedly   changed   at   the   hands   of  ^^^^  °^  *^^® 
XT        1  1  1       .  016.  Regime 

Napoleon,   but  the   mternal  structure   of  the   state   and   of 

society  had  remained  unaltered.     The  people  were  sharply 

divided  into  classes,  each  resting  on  a  different  legal  basis. 

Of  these  the  nobility  occupied  a  highly  privileged  position. 

They   enjoyed    freedom   from   compulsory    military   service, 

large  exemptions  from  taxation,  a  practical  monopoly  of  the 

best  offices  in  the  state.     They  possessed  a  large  part  of  the 


26      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

land,  from  which  in  many  cases  they  drew  enormous  revenues. 
Upon  their  estates  they  exercised  many  of  the  same  feudal 
rights  as  had  their  ancestors,  such  as  those  of  the  police 
power  and  of  administering  justice  through  their  own  courts. 
They  exacted  the  corvee  and  other  services  from  the  peasants. 
The  condition  of  the  peasants,  indeed,  who  formed  the 
immense  mass  of  the  population,  was  deplorable.  It  has  been 
stated  that  in  Bohemia,  for  instance,  they  owed  half  of  their 
time  and  two-thirds  of  their  crops  to  the  lords,  and  in  certain 
parts  it  was  not  uncommon  for  human  beings  and  cattle  to  be 
sheltered  by  the  same  roof.  The  peasants  had  indeed  been 
refused  the  right  to  purchase  release  from  their  heaviest 
burdens.  These  were  the  two  classes  into  which  Austrian 
society  was  divided,  for  the  bourgeoisie,  or  middle  class,  was 
only  slightly  developed  and  of  little  importance.  Industry 
•was  in  a  backward  state,  hampered  at  every  point  by  official 
regulations. 
Local  There  were   throughout  the   empire  various   local  bodies 

government,  called  estates,  which,  however,  constituted  no  real  check 
upon  the  absolutism  of  the  central  government.  They  in  no 
sense  constituted  local  self-government.  They  were  com- 
posed almost  entirely  of  nobles,  and  their  powers  were  slight. 
Their  sessions  were  brief,  perfunctory,  and  furnished  no 
political  training.  Hungary  occupied  a  somewhat  special 
position.  She  had  a  central  diet  or  parliament  and  long- 
established  county  governments.  They,  however,  were  no 
great  barrier  to  the  working  of  the  central  government, 
which,  indeed,  for  thirteen  years,  from  1812  to  1825,  re- 
fused in  spite  of  the  law  to  call  the  Diet  together.  Moreover, 
these  Hungarian  assemblies  did  not  represent  the  Hungarian 
people  but  merely  the  privileged  classes.  Absolutism  in  gov- 
ernment, feudalism  in  society,  special  privileges  for  the 
favored  few,  oppression  and  misery  for  the  masses,  such  was 
the  condition  of  Austria  in  1815. 
The  police  It  was  the  fixed  purpose  of  the  Government  to  maintain 
system.  things  as  they  were  and  it  succeeded  largely  for  thirty-three 


REPRESSION  IN  AUSTRIA  27 

years,  during  the  reign  of  Francis  I,  till  183^,  and  of  his 
successor,  Ferdinand  I  (1835-48.)  During  all  this  period 
Metternich  was  the  chief  minister,  the  accomplished  and  re- 
sourceful representative  of  the  status  quo.  His  system,  at 
war  with  human  nature,  at  war  with  the  modern  spirit,  rested 
upon  a  meddlesome  and  ubiquitous  police,  upon  elaborate 
espionage,  upon  a  vigilant  censorship  of  ideas.  The  head  of 
this  department  boasted  that  he  had  "  perfected  "  the  system 
of  Fouche,  an  achievement  similar  to  that  of  painting  the 
lily.  Censorship  was  applied  to  theaters,  newspapers,  books. 
The  frontiers  were  guarded  that  foreign  books  of  a  liberal 
character  might  not  slip  in  to  corrupt.  Political  science 
and  history  practically  disappeared  as  serious  studies.  Spies 
were  everywhere,  in  government  offices,  in  places  of  amuse- 
ment, in  educational  institutions.  Particularly  did  this  Gov- 
ernment fear  the  universities,  because  it  feared  ideas. 
Professors  and  students  were  subjected  to  humiliating  regu- 
lations. Spies  attended  lectures.  The  Government  insisted 
on  having  a  complete  list  of  the  books  that  each  professor 
took  out  of  the  university  library.  Text-books  were  pre- 
scribed.    Foreign  scholars  might  not  be  appointed  to  pro-  •'■^® 

fessional  positions,  nor  even  become  tutors  in  private  families.  „„  . 

.  espionage. 

Students  might  not  study  in  foreign  universities,  nor  might 
they  have  societies  of  their  own.  A  clerical  inquisition  was 
added  to  that  of  the  police.  Students  must  attend  church 
and  go  to  confession  at  stated  times.  Confession  papers 
were  required  at  all  examinations.  Confession  became  a 
regular  business  for  poor  students,  who  sold  their  papers  to 
comrades  needing  them  on  such  occasions.  As  examination 
periods  approached  such  papers  rose  and  fell  according  to 
supply  and  demand,  like  stocks  and  bonds.  Obviously,  under 
a  system  where  there  was  no  freedom  of  teaching  or  of  learn- 
ing, science  withered.  It  was  accordingly  perfectly  appro- 
priate for  a  friend  of  Metternich  to  congratulate  him  on 
the  entire  exclusion  of  the  scientific  spirit  from  the  universi- 
ties  of  Austria.      Austrians   might   not   travel  to   foreign 


28      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

countries  witliout  the  permission  of  the  Government,  which 
was  rarel}^  given.  Austria  was  scaled  as  nearly  hermetically 
as  possible  against  the  liberal  thought  of  Europe.  Intellec- 
tual stagnation  was  the  price  paid.  A  system  like  this 
needed  careful  bolstering  at  every  moment  and  at  every 
point.  The  best  protection  for  the  Austrian  system  was  to 
extend  it  to  other  countries.  Having  firmly  established  it 
Application  at  home,  Metternich  labored  with  great  skill  and  temporary 
of  the  success  to  apply  it  in  surrounding  countries,  in  Germany 

t       in      through  the  Diet  and  the  state  governments,  in  Italy  through 
other  interventions  and  treaties,  binding  Italian  states  not  to  fol- 

countries.  Jq^  policies  opposed  to  the  Austrian,  and  in  general  by 
bringing  about  a  close  accord  of  the  Great  Powers  on  this 
illiberal  basis. 

We  shall  now  trace  the  application  of  this  conception  of 
government  in  other  countries.  This  will  serve  among  other 
things  to  show  the  dominant  position  of  the  Danubian  em- 
pire in  Europe  from  1815  to  1848.  Vienna,  the  seat  of 
rigid  conservatism,  was  now  the  center  of  European  affairs, 
as  Paris,  the  home  of  revolution,  had  been  for  so  long. 

GERMANY 

Germany  a  One  of  the  most  remarkable  changes  of  the  nineteenth 
loose  con-  century  has  been  the  transformation  of  Germany,  from  a 
loose  and  inefficient  federation  into  an  imposing,  powerful 
empire.  Germany,  like  Italy,  was  long  a  geographical  ex- 
pression rather  than  a  nation.  The  map  of  Germany  was 
for  centuries  the  wonder  of  the  world.  It  was  a  tangle  of 
lilHputian  and  irrational  states,  many  of  them  "  archeo- 
logical  curiosities."  Since  the  outbreak  of  the  Revolution- 
ary Wars  these  had  disappeared  in  large  numbers,  greedily 
absorbed  by  their  more  powerful  neighbors.  Thus  the 
knights  of  the  empire,  the  ecclesiastical  states,  and  nearly  all 
the  free  cities,  had  disappeared,  so  that  between  1798  and 
1815  the  number  of  German  states  had  decreased  to  less 
than  forty.     This  work  of  simplification  had  been  largely 


THE  STATES  OF  GERMANY  29 

furthered  by  the  spirit  of  aggrandizement  of  the  German 
princes  themselves,  who  were  anxious  to  increase  their 
dominions,  no  matter  by  what  means,  and  who  eagerly  co- 
operated with  Napoleon,  the  purpose  of  whose  manipula- 
tions was  not  the  welfare  of  Germany.  The  German  states 
of  1815  were  of  all  shapes  and  sizes  and  of  various  denomina- 
tions. There  were  free  cities,  electorates,  margravates,  Varieties 
duchies,  grand  duchies,  and  five  kingdoms,  Prussia,  Hanover,  o^  states. 
Saxony,  Wiirtemberg,  and  Bavaria.  The  last  three  had  been 
raised  to  regal  rank  by  the  all-powerful  Napoleon,  and  at 
his  fall  it  was  found  impossible  to  reduce  to  duchies  again 
what  he  had  so  greatly  exalted. 

Down  to  1806  the  German  states  had  been  bound  together 
in  a  loose  union  called  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  about  which 
clustered  the  brilliant,  but  rather  airy,  unsubstantial  mem- 
ories of  centuries.  That  had  been  succeeded  from  1806  to 
1813  by  the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  a  creation  and 
instrument  of  Napoleon,  which  included  ultimately  nearly  all 
Germany  except  the  two  great  states,  Prussia  and  Austria. 
This  confederation  fell  with  its  creator  and  the  question  of 
the  future  organization  was  one  much  discussed  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna  and  settled  there,  not  by  the  restoration  of 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  which  many  advocated,  but  by  the 
erection  of  the  so-called  German  Confederation,  composed 
of  thirty-eight  states.^  The  central  organ  of  the  govern- 
ment was  to  be  a  Diet,  meeting  at  Frankfort.  This  was  The  Diet, 
to  consist  not  at  all  of  representatives  chosen  by  the  people, 
but  of  delegates  appointed  by  the  different  sovereigns  and 
serving  during  their  pleasure.  They  were  to  be  not  deputies 
empowered  to  decide  questions,  but  simply  diplomatic  repre- 
sentatives, voting  as  their  princes  might  direct.  Austria 
was  always  to  have  the  presidency  of  this  body.  The  method 
of  procedure  within  the  Diet  was  complicated  and  exceed- 

*  Made  39  by  the  admission  of  Hesse-Homburg  in  1817,  remaining  such 
only  until  1825,  when  the  line  of  Saxe-Gotha  died  out.  Reduced  by  sub- 
sequent extinction  of  other  houses  to  33  before  its  dissolution  in  1866. 


30      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERJVIANY 

ingly  cumbrous.  It  sat  sometimes  as  an  Ordinary  Assembly, 
sometimes  as  a  General  Assembly  or  Plenum.  The  differ- 
ence was  mainly  in  the  character  of  the  business  transacted, 
and  in  the  method  of  voting.  In  the  former  only  ordinary 
business  was  considered  and  matters  were  decided  by  a  ma- 
jority vote.  Each  of  the  eleven  large  states  had  one  vote, 
while  the  remaining  states  were  divided  into  six  groups, 
called  curiae,  each  group  having  a  single  vote.  There  were 
thus  seventeen  votes  in  all.  In  the  Plenum  were  considered 
all  questions  of  greater  importance.  Here  a  two-thirds  vote 
was  necessary  for  a  decision.  The  total  number  of  votes 
was  sixty-nine,  divided  among  the  different  states.  Austria, 
Prussia,  Saxony,  Bavaria,  Hanover,  and  Wiirtemberg,  had 
four  each,  others  three,  two,  and  each  state  had  at  least  one. 
The  distribution  was  grossly  unfair  if  it  was  intended  to 
show  the  relative  importance  of  the  several  states.  Prussia 
and  Austria,  great  European  powers,  had  no  more  weight 
than  Saxony,  a  small  state,  and  only  four  times  as  much  as 
'  Liechtenstein,  a  state  of  a  few  thousand  inhabitants.     Thus 

it  came  about  that  the  seven  larger  states,  having  five-sixths 
of  the  population  of  Germany,  could  be  outvoted  decisively 
by  the  smaller  states  representing  one-sixth. 
Its  powers  The  Congress  of  Vienna,  having  thus  created  an  assembly, 
not  defined,  (jjj  j^^^  proceed  to  define  its  powers.  The  jurisdiction  of  the 
Diet  was  left  to  be  decided  by  the  Diet  itself.  It  was  decided 
that  the  first  business  of  the  Diet  should  be  the  framing  of 
the  fundamental  laws  of  the  confederation  and  the  establish- 
ment of  the  organic  institutions.  This  might  seem  to  be 
unduly  elastic  and  to  be  giving  to  the  assembly  an  oppor- 
tunity to  claim  the  largest  powers  for  itself.  But  this  was 
not  to  be  feared,  as  in  the  adoption  and  in  the  change  of  any 
fundamental  law,  a  unanimous  vote  was  required,  and  all  the 
delegates  were  dependent  upon  home  governments  which 
were  averse  to  a  strong  union  and  which  had  now  the  absolute 
power  to  prevent  the  rise  of  one. 

This   Federal  Act   did  not  create   a   fatherland.     There 


S4 


'itMtttvUfog  o 


("•oningen 


^w^  1 


S:    SCH^VE 


^„  .""ifc 


/         r^uvdcv.J         A 


,g  jj.,oL^l->2ro„,<.„  i 


LO-ff^ 


^^_:;37 


■W-i 


'  -AntMerpJ 


.^" 


'\tn/„ 


50 


p^eTyw/^; 


Brg, 

Brussels 


O^ainiOc^Y''"'" 


^o^rti 


■  linkbi 


v"v  "■'-.^.<tiE(r 


Ha. 


O 


.* 


.V 


I  ranlcfwrfe- 


46 


BVVa-jJjurg        ' 

;  ;      K    I     ^  G  D. 
■  -Ansdach       Wurcmbg 


In    A   V  -g^-^ 

Auesbg  ^^"^- 

Municn  ^ 


^(■/^ff  ° 


^d/on 


^^^ovw 


■l^uisarm> 


''P^Cenevaf'  ^ 


Innslrurk 


oil 


o-*«nte 


M^m 


'Grenoblfe     ■  ;        To    1860   jf, 

TURI.V 


/.sw.<ft?^Aa?.o  J 


THE  GERMAN  CONFEDERATION  31 

was  no  king  or  emperor  of  Germany.     There  was  no  German 

flag.    No  one  was,  properly  speaking,  a  German  citizen.    He  Germany 

was   a   Prussian,   or  Austrian,   or   Bavarian   citizen,   as   the  ^^^  * 

nation, 
case  might  be.     The  federal  government  had  no  diplomatic 

representatives  in  the  other  countries  of  Europe,  but  each 
state  had,  or  could  have,  its  own  diplomatic  corps.  The 
German  as  German  had  no  legal  standing  abroad, — only  as 
a  citizen  of  a  separate  state  that  might,  but  generally  did 
not,  command  respect.  Each  state  had  the  right  to  make 
alliances  of  every  kind  with  the  others  or  with  non-German 
states.  The  only  serious  obligation  they  assumed  toward 
each  other  was  that  they  should  enter  into  no  engagement 
that  should  be  directed  against  the  safety  of  the  Confedera- 
tion or  that  of  any  individual  state  within  the  union ;  that 
they  should  not  make  war  upon  each  other  upon  any  pretext, 
but  should  submit  their  contentions  to  the  Diet ;  that  if  the 
Confederation  should  declare  war,  all  the  states  should  sup- 
port it,  and  that  none  should  negotiate  separately  with  the 
enemy  or  alone  make  peace. 

Such  was  the  constitution  given  to  Germany  by  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna.     It  created  a  government  in  which  obstruc- 
tion  was   easy,   positive   action   very   difficult.     Each   state 
possessed  powers   of  delaying  decisions   of  the   Diet   inter- 
minably, even,  in  many  cases,  of  rendering  them  impossible. 
Moreover   this   government,   weak   as   it  was,  was   not   even 
purely  German.     Three  rulers  of  foreign  states  were  mem- 
bers of  it  and  could  influence  its  deliberations,  particularly 
in  those  cases  where  an  individual  veto  would  prove  decisive, 
that  is,  in  all  the  most  fundamental  and  organic  matters. 
The  king  of  England  was  represented  for  Hanover,  a  pos- 
session of  the  English  royal  family,  the  king  of  Denmark  for 
Holstein,  the  king  of  the  Netherlands  for  Luxemburg.    Prus-  The   inter- 
sia  and  Austria  too  might  be  influenced  to  look  upon  the  Con-  national 
federation  in  the  light  of  their  international  position  and  in-  ^^^J^^  ^"^ 
terests,  Austria  particularly,  as  only  one-third  of  the  Aus-  Confeder- 
trian  Empire  was  within  the  bounds  of  th«  Confederation,  ation. 


32      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

The  other  two-thirds,  mainl}^  non-German,  were  not  included, 
yet  their  interests  might  dictate  the  policy  of  the  Austrian 
delegates.  Thus  Hungarians,  Poles,  and  Italians  might  in- 
directly influence  the  determination  of  purely  German  ques- 
tions in  the  German  Diet.  The  international  rather  than 
national  character  of  this  Confederation  was  further  mani- 
fested in  the  fact  that  the  chief  articles  of  the  Federal  Act 
establishing  it  were  inserted  in  the  Final  Act  of  the  Congress 
of  Vienna,  and  as  such  were  under  the  collective  guaranty  of 
the  powers  and  therefore  presumably  not  to  be  altered  with- 
out their  consent. 

It  is  clear  that  a  Germany  so  organized  was  not  a  nation 
but  only  a  loose  confederation  of  states  expressly  declared  to 
be    independent    and    sovereign,    a    confederation    designed 
simply  for  mutual  protection,  and  poorly  adapted  even  for 
that.     "  Judged  by  the  requirements  of  a  practical  political 
organization,"  says  von  Sybel,  "  this  German  Act  of  Con- 
federation, produced  with  so  much  effort,  possessed  about 
all  the  faults  that  can  render  a  constitution  utterly  useless." 
He  adds  that  it  "  was   received  by  the  German  nation   at 
large,  partly  with  cold  indifference,  and  partly  with  patriotic 
indignation." 
Dissatisfac-        This  indignation  was  vehemently  felt  by  the  Liberals,  who, 
tion  of  the  m^der  the  influence  of  the  tremendous  struggles  wuth  Napo- 
with  this       l^oJ^j  had  come  passionately  to  demand  a  close  and  firm  union 
system.  of  all  Germans  that  thus  they  might  realize  in  their  institu- 

tions and  in  the  face  of  all  the  world  the  greatness  which  they 
felt  was  in  them.  The  exaltation  of  the  final  struggle  with 
Napoleon  had  only  heightened  the  demand  of  the  more  pro- 
gressive spirits  for  national  unity,  that  thus  Germany  might 
never  henceforth  be  subjected  to  the  humiliations  of  the  past 
at  the  hands  of  foreigners.  This  longing  for  unity  and 
strength,  which  in  the  patriotic  atmosphere  of  the  late  wars 
had  seemed  so  near  realization,  was  now  seen  to  be  a  hope 
deferred.  German  unity  was,  according  to  Metternich,  an 
"  infamous  object,"  and  the  views  of  the  diplomats  at  Vienna 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  GERMAN  UNITY  33 

were  more  those  of  Mettemich  than  of  the  Liberals.  The 
latter  were  indignant  at  what  they  called  the  great  deception 
of  Vienna,  and  their  bitterness  was  to  be  a  factor  in  the  later 
development  of  Germany. 

That  they  were  from  the  very  force  of  circumstances,  the  Why  the 
very  nature  of  existing  conditions,  inevitably  destined  to  ^ 
disappointment  we  can  see  more  clearly  than  did  they,  swept  unity  was 
along  as  they  were  by  the  strong  patriotic  current  of  the  so  difficult, 
hour,  little  appreciating  the  bewildering,  baffling  complexity 
of  their  problem.  The  object  they  aimed  at  was  one  of  su- 
preme difficulty.  German  unity  was  not  simply  a  matter  of 
sentiment,  however  fine  and  just,  but  was  a  hard,  practical 
question  only  to  be  answered,  if  at  all,  by  ripe  political  sense 
and  wisdom.  It  involved  the  adjustment  of  many  conflicting 
and  perhaps  irreconcilable  interests.  Traditions,  centuries 
old,  must  be  overcome.  Mere  inertia  was  a  powerful  ob- 
stacle. And  another  was  the  fact  that  the  future  of  Ger- 
many was  not  left  for  the  Germans  to  work  out  alone.  It 
was  a  part  of  the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  of  the 
general  settlement  of  Europe.  This  brought  it  about  that 
the  Act  of  Federation  was  hastily  framed  and  that,  too, 
partially  by  powers  careless  of  German  interests  or  hostile 
to  them.  It  was  no  desire  of  neighboring  states  to  have  a 
strong  and  united  Germany.  But  the  main  obstacle  lay  in 
one  of  the  oldest,  most  persistent  facts  of  German  political 
life  and  history,  the  strong  states-rights  or  particularist 
feeling.  No  effective  union  could  be  established  unless  the 
various  members  would  surrender  some  of  their  authority. 
Not  one  of  the  German  princes  was  willing  to  pay  the  price. 
Austria,  more  non-German  than  German,  could  not  for  that 
very  reason  hope  to  be  the  supreme  power  in  a  really  united 
Germany,  therefore  she  favored  a  loose  union  wherein  she 
might,  by  playing  upon  rival  passions,  enjoy  a  lesser  leader- 
ship. Prussia  could  not  be  given  the  leadership  in  a  new 
empire,  as  Austria  would  not  consent  and  the  lesser  states 
would  be   alarmed.     Obviously,  none  of  the   smaller   states 


84      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 


The    states- 
right 
feeling. 


Snalism 

the  out- 
come of 
German 
evolution. 


could  hope  to  exercise  a  power  they  would  not  grant  to  either 
of  the  greater.  Moreover,  they  believed  that  any  sacrifice  of 
sovereignty  would  only  leave  them  exposed  to  the  aggrandiz- 
ing passions  of  the  great.  At  first  these  lesser  states,  indeed, 
wished  to  be  entirely  independent,  to  have  no  union  at  all, 
even  that  of  a  loose  confederation.  The  conclusive  argu- 
ment against  this  was  that  Germany  must  at  least  be  strong 
enough  so  that  no  second  series  of  events  like  that  of  the 
Napoleonic  invasions  and  conquests  should  again  occur. 

Thus  it  is  seen  that  the  radical  evil  of  the  German  situ- 
ation was  the  particularism  or  excessive  individualism  of  the 
states.  This  was  nothing  new,  but  had  been  for  centuries 
the  most  powerful  fact.  This  feeling  was  now  even  more 
pronounced  than  ever,  for  the  reason  that  the  lesser  states 
had  latterly  grown  stronger  by  their  absorption  of  their 
neighbors  in  the  period  just  elapsed.  National  unity  had 
been  wrecked  by  it.  It  could  only  be  restored,  says  Sybel, 
by  the  further  extreme  development  of  this  spirit — till  one 
state  should  become  so  large  that  it  would  overshadow  all 
the  rest  and  force  them  to  recognize  its  ascendency — then 
the  selfishness  of  one  would  end  in  the  unity  of  all.  Now 
the  unity  of  England  and  France  had  been  brought  about 
in  precisely  this  way,  by  the  absorption  by  one  state  of 
all  its  rivals,  but  the  outcome  of  German  evolution  had 
been  peculiar,  in  that  it  had  seen  the  rise  of  two  great 
powers,  not  one,  Prussia  and  Austria,  neither  able  to  con- 
quer or  push  the  other  aside,  and  each  most  jealous  of  any 
increase  of  the  other's  power.  Such  was  the  play  of  am- 
bition and  interest,  baffling  the  ingenuity  and  ability  of  those 
who  desired  a  real  and  fruitful  union  of  all  Germans.  A 
Prussian  field  marshal,  Clausewitz,  wrote  at  about  this  time : 
"  Germany  can  achieve  political  unity  only  in  one  way,  by 
the  sword;  by  one  of  its  states  subjugating  all  the  others,"  a 
thought  put  later  into  a  more  resounding  phrase  by  Bis- 
marck, and  expressing  approximately  the  method  by  which 
unity  was  finally  achieved.     But  so  hard  a  doctrine  lay  be- 


THE  DESIRE  FOR  CONSTITUTIONS  35 

jond  the   range  of  understanding  of  the  early   nineteenth 

century. 

The  Liberals  of  Germany,  eager  for  national  unit}',  thus  The  demand 

suffered  a  severe  defeat  at  Vienna.     They  were  ffiven  a  con-  consti- 

.  tutional 

federation,  looser  than  that  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  and  government 

with  none  of  the  glory  and  luster  of  the  latter,  a  union  only 
nominal,  inefficient,  and  prosaic,  containing  no  vital  force. 
The  Liberals  were  also  eager  for  reforms  within  the  states, 
for  constitutional  government,  for  parliaments  with  real 
powers,  for  the  end  of  absolutism.  Here  again  they  were 
disappointed.  They  had  hoped  to  get  a  mandatory  pro- 
vision in  the  Federal  Act  establisliing  representative  legis- 
latures in  each  one  of  the  states  of  Germany.  In  appealing 
to  his  people  to  rally  around  him  in  the  war  against  Napo- 
leon, the  King  of  Prussia  had  very  recentlj'  promised  his 
people  a  constitution  and  had  urged  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  that  the  Federal  Act  should  require  every  mem- 
ber of  the  Confederation  to  grant  a  representative  con- 
stitution to  his  subjects  within  a  year.  Metternich,  even  Metter- 
more  opposed  to  free  political  institutions  than  to  a  strong  ^^^^'^  ^^O" 
central  government,  succeeded  in  thwarting  the  reformers  at  rjogi+inj, 
this  point  also,  by  having  this  explicit  and  mandatory  decla- 
ration made  vague  and  lifeless.  Thus  the  famous  Article 
XIII  of  the  Federal  Act  was  made  to  read :  "  A  constitution 
based  upon  the  system  of  estates  will  be  estabished  in  all  the 
states  of  the  union."  The  character  of  the  new  constitu- 
tions was  not  sketched ;  and  the  time  limit  was  omitted.  A 
journalist  was  justified  in  saying  that  all  that  was  guaran- 
teed to  the  German  people  was  an  "  unlimited  right  of  expec- 
tation." The  future  was  to  show  the  vanity  even  of  expecta- 
tion, the  hollowness  of  even  so  mild  a  promise.  The  Liberals 
had  desired  something  more  substantial  than  hope.  Austria 
and  Prussia,  the  two  leading  states,  governing  the  great 
mass  of  the  German  people,  never  executed  this  provision. 
Nor  did  many  of  the  smaller  states. 

Germany,  then,  in  1815,  consisted  of  thirty-eight  loosely 


36      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

connected  states.  Some  of  these  were  very  large,  some  ex- 
ceedingly small.  Prussia  and  Austria  ranked  with  the 
greatest  powers  of  Europe.  Some  of  them  were  old,  had 
their  individual  history,  traditions,  and  prestige.  Others 
were  new,  or  had  recently  undergone  such  sweeping  changes 
as  to  be  practically  new.  Their  future  was  highly  problem- 
atical. Their  boundaries  were  intertwined  and  complicated. 
Some  were  what  are  called  enclaves,  that  is,  were  entirely 
surrounded  by  another  state,  having  no  egress  to  the  out- 
side world  save  through  the  neighbor's  territory.  Economic 
life  could  not  flourish  owing  to  the  tariffs  and  change  of 
coinage  that  met  merchant  and  trader  at  every  border,  and 
owing  also  to  the  wretched  means  of  communication  and 
transportation.  These  states  presented  many  varieties  of 
Various  governments.  There  were  some  where  absolutism  prevailed, 
forms  of  where  the  prince  was  the  law-giver,  the  executor,  and  the 
governmen  j^^jgg^  ruling  without  the  aid  of  any  assembly,  without  out- 
ferent  Ger-  side  restraints.  Such  were  the  two  greatest,  Austria  and 
man  states.  Prussia,  and  such  were  several  of  the  smaller.'  There  were 
others  where  the  prince  was  assisted  in  his  work  by  assemblies, 
bodies  which  the  people  had  no  right  to  claim,  but  which  the 
ruler  in  his  condescension  saw  fit  to  call  about  him,  in  no  sense 
popular  bodies,  chosen  by  the  people,  but  composed  mainly  of 
nobles.  These  exercised  little  control  over  the  acts  of  the 
prince,  but  were  at  least  in  a  position  to  present  grievances. 
Most  of  the  states  of  Germany,  as  Hanover,  Mecklenburg, 
and  Saxony,  were  of  this  kind.  There  were  other  states 
where  the  prince  granted  a  written  constitution,  somewhat 
after  the  French  model,  providing  for  an  elective  assembly 
to  which  was  given  some  power  over  the  government's  pro- 
posals for  taxes  and  laws.  Such  an  assembly  was  not  to  con- 
trol the  Government,  as  did  the  English  Parliament,  by  forc- 
ing the  ruler  to  choose  his  ministers  from  persons  satisfac- 
tory to  it.  The  prince  was  the  government  in  every  instance 
but  he  preferred  to  ask  the  co-operation  of  his  people  up  to 
a  certain  point,  and  he  granted  them  rights,  such  as  free- 


CONSTITUTIONS  IN  THE  MINOR  STATES       37 

dom  of  the  press  and  of  speech,  which  were  coming  to  be 
more  and  more  demanded  by  Europeans  generally.  Saxe- 
Weimar  was  the  most  prominent  state  of  this  class.  Its 
prince  received  the  sincere  laudation  of  the  Liberals  and  the 
sincere  aversion  of  Metternlch. 

In  none  of  these  systems  was  the  principle  of  popular  Popular 
sovereignty  recognized.  Germany  was  thoroughly  monarch- 
ical.  The  only  question  was  whether  monarchy  should  recognized, 
undergo  a  change  of  nature  more  or  less  extensive,  or  should 
assert  its  old  prerogatives  in  all  their  fulness.  After  the 
disappointments  of  the  Vienna  Congi'css  the  Liberals  of  Ger- 
many pinned  their  hope  to  the  increase  of  states  of  the  Saxe- 
Weimar  class.  It  was  clear  that  Germans  were  not  to  have 
unity.  Might  they  not  have  political  and  civil  liberty.'' 
There  seemed  some  ground  for  optimism.     Constitutions  were  Constitu- 

(Xr anted    in    the    states    of    southern    Germany    in    the    next  "°"^ 

°  ....     granted   in 

few  years,  in  Bavaria  and  Baden  m  1818,  in  Wiirtemberg  in  certain 

1819,    and   in   Hesse-Darmstadt   in    1820.      It   matters   not  states. 

whether  the  princes  granted  these  for  selfish  reasons  in  order 

to  gain  popular  support  for  a  struggle  which  they  felt  was 

imminent  with  their  more  powerful  colleagues,  Prussia  and 

Austria,  for  the   advantage  to   their  peoples   remained  the 

same. 

But  it  soon  became  evident  after  1815  that  while  there 

were  signs  of  progress  there  were  more  signs  of  a  menacing 

reaction.     Austria  having  set  her  house  in  order,  having  put 

a  Chinese  wall  about  her  empire,  marked  innovation  in  the 

neighboring  lands  for  special  hostility  when  the  favorable 

moment  should  arrive.     Metternich's  programme  was  stated 

in  one  of  his  confidential  reports  to  his  Emperor:  "  We  must 

lead  Germany  to  adopt  our  principles  without  our  appearing 

to  impose  those  principles  upon  her."     This   could  not  be 

done    abruptly    and    harshly.      Two    personages    were    too 

powerful  to  be  treated  summarily,  Alexander  I  of  Russia  and 

Frederick  William  III  of  Prussia.     The  former  was  in  1815 

nothing  less  than  a  "  Jacobin  "  in  Metternich's  opinion,  as 


38      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

he  was  himself  granting  a  constitution  to  Poland  and  favor- 
ing constitutionalism  in  Germany  and  Italy  and  elsewhere. 
Reaction  could  not  be  successful  unless  he  should  come  to  see 
The  King      the  error  of  his  ways.     The  King  of  Prussia  had  promised 

of    Prussia     ,^  constitution  to  his  country  as  explicitly  as  a  man  could. 

becomes    rc" 

actionarv       Mettcrnich  was  pre-eminently  a  man  who  knew  how  to  bide 

his  time,  and  who  knew  how,  when  the  proper  moment  arrived, 
to  strike  hard.  His  time  was  not  long  in  coming.  Fred- 
erick William  III  was  both  procrastinating  and  timid. 
Moreover,  the  reactionary  party  shortly  after  1815  won 
ascendency  at  his  court.  Two  years  went  by  before  he  ap- 
pointed the  special  committee  to  undertake  the  preparation 
of  the  promised  constitution.  Its  report  after  a  long  and 
slow  investigation  was  unfavorable  to  the  project,  which  was 
finally  allowed  to  drop.  The  Prussian  Government  slipped 
back  easily  into  the  old  familiar  autocratic  grooves.  Ac- 
cording to  ]\Ietternich  the  king's  chief  mental  trait  was  "  the 
repressive,"  and  this  gradually  reasserted  itself.  More  im- 
portant was  the  change  in  Alexander  I,  who  by  1818,  for 
reasons  that  are  somewhat  obscure,  had  gone  over  to  con- 
servatism. With  the  rulers  of  Russia  and  Prussia  in  this 
state  of  mind  Metternich's  course  was  made  easy.  He  was 
able  to  use  certain  current  events  to  render  himself  incon- 
testably  the  dominant  personality  in  Europe,  and  to  secure 
the  prevalence  of  the  Austrian  principles  of  government  far 
beyond  the  confines  of  Austria  itself. 
Indignation        The  years  immediately  succeeding  1815  were  years  of  rest- 

of  the  lessness  and  uncertainty.     The  German  Liberals  were,  as  we 

Liberals.         ,  ...  ,      ..  i  ■  •       «      r.  it- 

have  seen,  indignant  at  the      great  deception      or   Vienna. 

But  they  hoped  that  at  least  the  various  states  of  Germany 
might  be  reformed  along  constitutional  lines.  Article  XIII 
of  the  Federal  Act  rendered  this  possible,  though  it  did  not, 
to  their  great  regret,  ensure  it.  Here  again  was  hope  de- 
ferred, for  as  the  years  went  by  the  signs  that  little  had  been 
gained  in  the  direction  of  larger  liberty  multiplied.  Only  a 
few  states  entered  the  new  path.     The  large  ones  stood  aloof. 


THE  BURSCHENSCHAFT  39 

and  in  many  of  the  small  ones  the  old  regime  was  restored  in 
its  entirety  by  the  returning  princes  and  with  a  lamentable 
lack  of  humor.  The  disappointment  of  Liberals  was  intense, 
their  criticism  trenchant.  The  chief  seat  of  disaffection  was 
found  in  the  universities  and  in  newspapers  edited  by  uni- 
versity men.  As  the  subjection  of  these  centers  of  agitation 
was  to  be  the  main  object  of  Metternich's  German  policy,  it 
is  well  to  describe  their  activity. 

The  students  of  Jena  had  during  the  Napoleonic  wars  Ferment 

founded  a  society  called  the  Burschenschaft,  whose  purpose  ^^  *^®  ^^*° 

•     •  vcTsi^ics 

was  the  inculcation   of  an  intense  national  patriotism,  the 

constant  exaltation  of  the  ideal  of  a  common  fatherland. 
Societies  were  nothing  new  in  German  universities,  but  the 
previous  ones,  the  Corps,  had  included  in  their  membership 
only  those  coming  from  the  same  state  or  province.  They 
thus  preserved  that  sense  of  localism  which  was  the  bane  of 
German  life.  The  Burschenschaft  was  based  on  the  opposite 
principle  of  membership  derived  from  all  the  different  states, 
thus  ignoring  local  lines,  and  teaching  a  larger  duty,  a 
larger  devotion,  a  larger  idea  of  association.  Glowing  pa- 
triotism was  the  characteristic  of  the  new  organization.  It 
soon  succeeded  in  establishing  chapters  in  sixteen  universities. 
It  was  decided  to  hold  a  meeting  of  representatives  of  all 
the  chapters  and  to  give  it  the  character  of  a  patriotic  cele-  The 

bration.    The  place  chosen  was  the  Wartburff,  a  castle  famous  ^^rtburg 

.  Festival, 

as  the  shelter  of  Luther  after  his  outlawry  at  the  Diet  of 

Worms,  and  the  date  chosen  was  October  18,  1817,  famous  as 
being  the  fourth  anniversary  of  the  battle  of  Leipsic,  and  ap- 
proximately the  three  hundredth  of  the  posting  of  Luther's 
Theses.  Several  hundred  students  met.  Their  festival  was 
religious  as  well  as  patriotic.  They  partook  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  together  and  listened  to  impassioned  speeches  com- 
memorating the  great  moments  in  German  history,  the  libera- 
tion from  Rome  and  the  liberation  from  Napoleon.  In  the 
evening  they  built  a  bonfire  and  threw  into  it  various  symbols 
of  the  hated  reaction,  notably  an  illiberal  pamphlet  of  which 


40      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 


the  King  of  Prussia  had  expressed  his  approval.  They  then 
dispersed,  but  their  deed  lived  after  them.  This  student 
performance  had  unexpected  consequences.  What  was  ap- 
parently a  harmless  and  exuberant  jollification  seemed  to 
conservative  rulers  and  statesmen  evidence  of  an  unhealthy 
and  dangerous  ferment  of  opinion,  and  the  rumors  that 
gained  currency  about  this  celebration  made  it  famous.  It 
enjoyed  a  reputation  altogether  out  of  proportion  to  its  real 
importance,  which  was  slight.  Mettemich  described  it  to  the 
German  rulers  as  a  portent  of  far  greater  dangers  sure  to 
come.  Shortly  an  event  much  more  alarming  occurred  which 
The  murder  seemed  to  justify  this  prognostication,  the  murder  of  Kotze- 
of  Kotzebue.  ]juq^  a  journalist  and  playwright,  who  was  hated  by  the 
students  as  a  spy  of  Russia  in  Germany.  A  divinity  student, 
Karl  Sand,  went  to  his  house  in  ]\Iannheim  and  stabbed  him 
in  the  heart,  March  23,  1819.  Later  an  attempt  was  made 
to  assassinate  an  important  official  of  the  Government  of 
Nassau.  These  and  other  occurrences  pla3'^ed  perfectly  into 
the  hands  of  Metternich,  who  was  seeking  the  means  of 
establishing  reaction  in  Germany  as  it  had  been  established 
in  Austria.  They  gave  him  what  he  most  needed,  a  weapon 
whereby  to  dissuade  Alexander  I  and  Frederick  William  III 
from  all  further  toying  with  liberalism  and  to  convert  the 
Holy  Alliance,  hitherto  a  mere  trumpet  for  biblical  phrases, 
into  an  engine  of  oppression.  Were  not  all  of  these  occur- 
rences manifestations  of  the  same  anarchical  spirit,  the  de- 
sire to  overthrow  monarchical  institutions.'*  All  were  in- 
discriminately ascribed  to  the  Burschenschaft,  whereas  it 
had  only  been  responsible  for  the  Wartburg  festival.  The 
steps  now  taken  to  combat  liberalism,  which  was  charged  with 
such  unequal  misdeeds,  fonn  a  landmark  in  German  history. 
Metternich,  having  previously  had  an  interview  with  Fred- 
erick William  III,  in  which  he  was  assured  of  the  latter's  sup- 
port in  the  policy  to  be  outlined  to  silence  the  opposition, 
called  the  ministers  of  those  German  governments  of  which 
he  felt  sure  to  a  series  of  conferences  at  Carlsbad.     In  these 


The   Holy 
Alliance 
converted 
into  an 
engine   of 
oppression 


THE  CARLSBAD  DECREES  41 

conferences  was  fashioned  the  triumph  of  reaction  in  Ger- 
many. By  the  decrees  which  were  adopted  Metternich  became 
tlie  conqueror  of  the  Confederation.  Only  eight  states  were 
represented,  those  upon  which  Metternich  could  count.  The  The 
decrees  there  drawn  up  were  then  submitted  to  the  Diet  Carlsbad 
at  Frankfort,  all  the  customary  modes  of  procedure  of  that 
body  were  cast  aside,  and  a  vote  with  no  preceding  debate  was 
forced,  so  that  the  representatives  of  the  states  who  had  not 
been  at  Carlsbad  did  not  have  time  to  ask  instructions  of 
their  Governments.  Tims  the  decrees,  rushed  by  illegal  and 
violent  methods  through  the  Diet,  became  the  law  of  Ger- 
many, binding  upon  every  state.  They  were  the  work  of 
Austria,  seconded  by  Prussia.  The  small  states  resented  the 
indignity  to  which  they  had  been  subjected  but  could  do 
nothing.  Carlsbad  signifies  in  German  history  the  suppres- 
sion of  liberty  for  a  generation.  As  these  decrees  really 
determined  the  political  system  of  Germany  until  1848,  they 
merit  a  full  description. 

It  was  stated  once  for  all  that  the  famous  Article  XIII  of  Provision 

the  act  establishing  the  German  Confederation,  namely,  that  '^o^ceming 

^  .  constitu- 

"  a  constitution  based   upon   the   system   of   estates   will   be  tional   gov- 

established  in  all  the  states  of  the  union  "  should  not  be  inter-  ernment. 

preted  as  meaning  constitutions  of  a   foreign  pattern,  but 

representation    of    estates   such   as   had  been    customary   in 

German  states  even  earlier.     It  was  the  earnest  desire  of  the 

Libera.ls  to  get  away  from  such  old  and  useless  assemblies. 

The   great    forces    active    against    the   prevalence    of   Met- 

ternich's  system  were  free  parliaments,  free  speech,  and  a 

free  press.     It  was  hoped  that  the  first  of  these  was  thus 

prevented. 

It  was  next  provided  that  there  should  be  at  every  uni-  Control  of 

versity  in  the  land  a  special  representative  to  watch  both  *^^  ^°^" 

vcrsitics 

professors    and    students.     The    function    of    these    agents 

should  be  "  to  see  to  the  strictest  enforcement  of  existing 

laws  and  disciplinary  regulations ;  to  observe  carefully  the 

spirit  which  is  shown  by  the  instructors  in  the  university  in 


4i>      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

their  public  lectures  and  regular  courses,  and,  without  di- 
rectly interfering  in  scientific  matters,  or  in  the  methods  of 
teacliing,  to  give  a  salutary  direction  to  the  instruction, 
having  in  view  the  future  attitude  of  the  students."  It  was 
provided  that  all  teachers  who  should  "  propagate  harmful 
doctrines  hostile  to  public  order  or  subversive  of  existing 
governmental  institutions,"  that  is,  all  who  should  not  hold 
absolutism,  as  Metternich  understood  it,  to  be  the  only  legi- 
timate form  of  government,  should  be  removed  from  their 
positions  and  that  once  so  removed  they  should  not  be  ap- 
pointed to  positions  in  any  other  educational  institution  in 
Prohibition    any  state.     Other  provisions  were  directed  against  secret  or 

.  ,.  unauthorized  societies  in  the  universities,  particularly  that 

societies.         ,  .     .  . 

"  association  established  some  years  since  under  the  name  " 

of  the  Burschenschaft,  "  since  the  very  conception  of  the 
society  implies  the  utterly  unallowable  plan  of  permanent 
fellowship  and  constant  communication  between  the  various 
universities."  Furthermore  "no  student,  who  shall  be  ex- 
pelled from  a  university  by  a  decision  of  the  University 
Senate  Avhich  was  ratified  or  prompted  by  the  agent  of  the 
government,  or  who  shall  have  left  the  institution- in  order 
to  escape  such  a  decision,  shall  be  received  in  any  other 
university."  ^ 
The  By    these    provisions    it    was    expected    that    the    entire 

censorship  academic  community,  professors  and  students,  would  be  re- 
0  e  press.  (jm,g(j  ^^  silence.  The  universities  had  become  the  centers  of 
political  agitation.  That  agitation  would  now  cease  under 
compulsion.  There  was  one  other  enemy,  the  press,  and 
drastic  provisions  were  adopted  to  smother  its  independence 
beneath  a  comprehensive  censorship.  Finally,  a  special 
commission  was  created  to  ferret  out  all  secret  revolutionary 
societies  and  conspiracies  that  might  threaten  the  nation, 
and  this  commission  was  to  have  full  powers  to  examine 
and  arrest  any  German,  no  matter  of  what  state  he  might 

'  Quotations  are  from  University  of  Pennsylvania  Translations  and  Re- 
prints, Vol.  I,  No.  3.     Edited  by  J.  H.  Robinson. 


THE  PERSECUTION  OF  THE  LIBERALS       43 

be  a  citizen.      It  discovered  very  little,  but  it  pursued  for 

years  a  policy  as  vexatious  as  it  was  petty. 

The  Carlsbad  Conference  is  an  important  turning  point  Reaction 

in  the  history  of  central  Europe.      It  siarialized  the  domi-  ^"^^  order  or 

.       .  .  .  the  day  in 

nance  of  Mettemich  in  Germany  as  well  as  in  Austria.     Its  QQ^msLny. 

most  important  feature  is  the  surrender  of  Prussia  to 
Austrian  leadership.  Down  to  1819  there  was  ground  for 
hope  that  Prussia  might  be  a  leader,  though  a  cautious  one, 
in  the  liberalization  of  Germany.  That  hope  now  vanished. 
Reaction  was  henceforth  the  order  of  the  day  in  this  great 
state.  Frederick  William  HI.  shortly  abandoned  definitely 
all  idea  of  granting  the  constitution  which  he  had  promised  in 
1815.  In  the  period  of  national  humiliation  from  1807  to 
1813  a  notably  liberal  spirit  had  characterized  the  actions 
of  the  Prussian  Government.  Many  reforms  had  been  ef- 
fected at  the  instigation  of  such  men  as  Stein.  But  the  period 
was  too  brief  and  the  reforms  remained  incomplete.  It  was 
expected  that  they  would  be  perfected  after  1815,  but  now 
it  was  clear  that  they  would  not.  Indeed,  in  some  respects, 
though  fortunately  not  in  all,  the  liberal  achievements  of 
those  years  were  curtailed.  But  after  1819  the  period  of  full 
reaction  came  in.  In  many  respects  this  period  was  more 
odious  in  Prussia  than  in  any  other  state.  The  persecu-  The 
tion  of  "  demagogues  "  was  a  sorry  spectacle,  as  it  was  persecution 
in  reality  largely  a  persecution  of  men  who  should  have 
had  all  honor  shown  them  as  national  heroes.  Jahn,  the 
founder  of  gymnastic  societies,  whch  had  been  most  effective 
in  nerving  the  young  men  of  Prussia  to  heroic  action,  was 
for  five  years  subjected  to  the  inquisition  of  the  police  and 
to  severe  imprisonment,  only  to  be  discharged  because  nothing 
could  be  found  against  him  meriting  punishment.  Arndt, 
whose  impassioned  poems  had  intensified  the  national  patriot- 
ism in  the  wars  against  Napoleon,  was  shamefully  treated. 
His  house  was  searched,  his  papers  were  ransacked.  The 
charges  against  him  show  the  triviality  of  this  petty  police 
inquisition.     One  official  discovered  revolution  in  the  expres- 


44.      REACTION  IN  AUSTRIA  AND  GERMANY 

sion  "  tliat  lies  bcjond  my  sphere."  Sphere  meant  a  ball,  a 
ball  a  bullet.  Was  not  that  a  summons  to  insurrection  and 
murder.'*  Arndt  indignantly  protested  that  he  hated  "  all 
secret  intrigues  like  snakes  of  hell."  Nevertheless  he  was 
removed  from  his  professorship  and  for  twenty  years  was  pre- 
vented from  pursuing  his  vocation.  Private  letters  were  sys- 
tematically opened  by  the  police  in  the  search  for  some  trace 
of  revolution.  Even  Gneisenau,  despite  his  brilliant  record 
as  a  soldier,  had  for  years  to  experience  this  invasion  of 
his  private  rights.  Spies  went  to  hear  the  sermons  of  the 
most  popular  preacher  in  Berlin,  Schleiermacher,  and  re- 
ported it  as  a  highly  suspicious  circumstance  that  he  had 
said  that  we  owe  to  Christ  the  liberation  of  all  spiritual 
forces  and  that  every  true  Christian  must  believe  that  the 
kingdom  of  truth  will  conquer  the  kingdom  of  darkness.  A 
publisher  was  forbidden  to  bring  out  a  new  edition  of  Fichte's 
Address  to  the  German  Nation,  which  had  so  splendidly  stirred 
the  youth  of  Prussia  in  the  years  of  Napoleon's  supremacy. 
Prussia  This  was,  in  the  opinion  of  all  Liberals,  the  great  treason 

a  docile         of  Prussia,  this   abdication  of  independent  judgment,   this 

.     .  .  docile  surrender  to  the  leadership  of  Austria.     "  Prussia," 

Austria.  _  ^ 

said  Metternich  to  the  Russian  ambassador,  "  has  left  us  the 
place  which  many  Germans  wished  to  give  to  her." 

The  situation  was  much  the  same  in  the  other  German 
states.  With  Austria  and  Prussia  hand  in  glove,  there  was 
little  opportunity  for  the  lesser  states.  The  spirit  of  the 
Carlsbad  Decrees  hung  heavily  over  all  Germany.  Made 
even  stronger  the  following  year  by  the  Vienna  Conference 
of  1820,  this  system  remained  in  force  until  the  decade 
beginning  with  1840.  The  revolutions  of  1830  brought 
forth  additional  decrees  in  1832  and  1834<  intensifying  the 
persecution  of  the  academic  world  and  of  politicians  sus- 
pected of  liberalism.  Metternich  had  succeeded  in  extending 
his  system  over  the  German  Confederation.  We  shall  now 
see  how  other  countries  were  affected  by  the  same  system, 
how  its  influence  expanded  still  further. 


CHAPTER  III 

REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND 
ITALY 

SPAIN 

The  fundamental  purpose  of  the  rulers  of  Europe  after 
1815,  as  we  have  seen,  was  to  prevent  the  "  revolution,"  as 
thcj  called  it,  from  again  breaking  out;  in  other  words,  to 
prevent  democratic  and  constitutional  ideas  from  once  more 
becoming  dominant.  The  precautions  taken  by  these  con- 
servatives passed  in  the  political  language  of  the  time  as 
the  Metternich  system.  Sufficient  precautions  had  been 
taken,  as  we  have  seen,  in  central  Europe.  France  was 
powerless  to  disturb  for  a  long  while  to  come.  England  was 
stiffly  loyal  to  her  old  regime.  But  just  as  order  seemed 
sohdly  re-established  events  occurred  in  the  two  southern 
peninsulas  of  Europe,  Spain  and  Italy,  which  showed  that 
a  system  of  repression  to  be  successful  must  be  Argus-eyed 
and  omnipresent.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  at  this  point 
to  trace  briefly  the  history  of  southern  Europe  that  we  may 
understand  the  events  of  1820,  the  first  real  challenge  of 
the  Metternich  system. 

In  1808  Napoleon  had  by  an  act  of  violence  seized  the  Spanish 
crown  of  Spain,  and  until  1814  had  kept  the  Spanish  king.  Constitution 
Ferdinand  VII,  virtually  a  prisoner  in  France,  placing  his 
own  brother  Joseph  on  the  vacant  throne.  The  Spaniards 
rose  against  the  usurper  and  for  years  carried  on  a  vigorous 
guerilla  warfare,  aided  by  the  English,  and  ending  finally 
in  success.  As  their  king  was  in  the  hands  of  the  enemy 
they  proceeded  in  his  name  to  frame  a  government.  Being 
liberally   minded   they   drew   up   a   constitution,   the  famous 

45 


46  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

Constitution  of  1812,  a  document  thoroughly  saturated 
with  tlie  principles  of  the  French  Constitution  of  1791.  It 
asserted  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  vesting  the  execu- 
tive power  in  the  king,  the  legislative  in  the  Cortes  or  Assem- 
bly, a  body  consisting  of  a  single  chamber  and  elected  by 
indirect  universal  suffrage,  the  citizens  of  the  colonies  having 
the  same  right  to  vote  as  did  those  of  the  mother  country. 
Some  of  the  features  of  the  French  Constitution  which  had 
worked  badly  were  nevertheless  adopted.  Deputies  were  to 
be  chosen  for  two  years  and  to  be  ineligible  for  re-election. 
Ministers  might  not  be  members  of  the  chamber.  Henceforth 
the  Cortes  were  to  be  the  central  organ  of  government,  the 
king  being  very  subordinate.  He  might  not  leave  the 
country  without  their  consent,  nor  marry,  nor  might  he 
dissolve  or  prorogue  the  Assembly,  and  in  the  intervals  be- 
tween sessions  a  committee  of  the  Cortes  was  to  watch  over 
the  execution  of  the  Constitution  and  the  laws.  The  Consti- 
tution proclaimed  the  principles  of  liberty  and  equality 
before  the  law,  thus  abolishing  the  old  regime.  The  extreme 
liberality  of  this  Constitution  is  explained  by  the  fact  that 
it  was  the  work  of  deputies  coming  in  the  main  from  the  coast 
provinces,  which  were  more  democratic  than  the  others.  The 
classes  hitherto  dominant  in  Spain,  the  nobility  and  the 
clergy,  for  the  time  being  lost  their  supremacy.  The  Con- 
stitution was  the  work  of  a  small  minority,  was  never  sub- 
mitted to  the  people  for  ratification,  and  its  durability  was 
Ferdinand  therefore  problematical.  Indeed,  its  doom  was  sealed  by  the 
^^'  reappearance  in  Spain,  on  the  downfall  of  Napoleon,  of  the 

legitimate   king,  Ferdinand   VII. 

This  prince,  now  restored  to  his  throne,  was  Ill-fitted  for 
rule,  both  by  temperament  and  training.  Cruel,  suspicious, 
deceitful,  unscrupulous,  his  character  was  odious,  his  intel- 
lect lacked  all  distinction.  His  education  had  been  woe- 
fully neglected,  nor  had  experience  taught  him  anything  of 
statesmanship.  He  had  not  used  his  leisure  as  Napoleon's 
prisoner   for    reading   or   the   study   of   political   questions. 


REACTION  IN  SPAIN  47 

But,  instead,  he  liad  embroidered  with  his  own  hands  a  robe 
of  white  silk  with  ornaments  of  gold  for  the  Madonna  of  the 
altar  in  the  church  at  Valen9ay,  a  fact  which  was  made  known 
to  the  Spanish  people  by  his  confessor.  Indeed, the  pamphlet 
which  contained  this  edifying  announcement  went  through 
seven  editions  in  a  short  time, — a  fact  that  not  only  paints 
tlie  King  but  his  people  as  well. 

There  was  every  reason  to  expect  that  such  a  man  would  Abolition 
thrust  aside  the  paper  constitution  that  so  greatly  limited  o^  *^^ 
his  power,  if  he  felt  able  to  do  so.  The  boundlessly  enthusi-  ^.^^ 
astic,  even  hysterical  manner  in  which  the  Spaniards  re- 
ceived him  convinced  him  that  he  could  go  to  any  length. 
The  Constitution  of  1812  had  the  support  of  only  a  very 
small  minority  of  the  educated  people.  Th>e  nobility,  the 
clergy,  many  of  the  leaders  of  the  army,  and  the  ignorant 
and  fanatical  populace  wanted  a  king  of  the  old  type.  The 
King,  seeing  the  way  made  plain,  promptly  took  action.  Be- 
fore he  reached  his  capital  he  declared  the  Constitution  and 
the  decrees  of  the  Cortes  null  and  void,  "  as  if  these  things 
had  never  been  done."  By  this  stroke  and  the  rapturous 
acquiescence  of  the  people  absolutism  was  restored.  A 
furious  reaction  began,  a  wild  hunt  for  everyone  in  any 
way  connected  with  the  recent  history  of  Spain.  Liberals  Persecution 
and  those  who  had  adhered  to  Joseph,  Napoleon's  brother,  °  ^  ®^^  ^' 
were  persecuted.  The  Inquisition  was  re-established ;  the 
Jesuits  returned  in  triumph.  The  press  was  gagged  once 
more.  Liberal  books  were  destroyed  wherever  found,  and 
particularly  all  copies  of  the  Constitution.  Thousands  of 
political  prisoners  were  punished  with  varying  severity. 
Ferdinand  would  probably  have  been  forced  into  a  re- 
actionary policy  by  his  own  people  and  by  the  other  powers  of 
Europe,  even  had  his  personal  inclinations  not  prompted  him 
to  it.     But  this  reaction  was  much  too  furious,  lasted  too 

long,  and  in  the  end  weakened  the  King's  position. 

J^i      ^  /.  T^      1-         1      •  •  •  1  •       T  M      Inefficiency 

Ihe  Government  or  Ferdniand,  vigorous  ni  punishmg  Lib-  ^^  ^j^g  q^^^ 

erals,  was  utterly  incompetent  and  indolent  in  other  matters,  ernment. 


48  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

Spain,  a  countr}'  of  about  eleven  million  people,  was  wretch- 
edly poor  and  ignorant.  Agriculture  was  primitive.  Com- 
merce and  industry  were  shackled  by  monopolies  and  un- 
reasonable prohibitions  upon  exportation  and  importation. 
Industrial  activity  was  further  lesssened  by  the  large  num- 
ber of  saints'  days,  which  were  carefully  observed.  What 
education  there  was  was  in  the  hands  of  ecclesiastics.  The 
Government  of  Ferdinand  made  no  attempt  to  improve  these 
deplorable  conditions.  But  in  addition  to  all  this  it  failed 
to  discharge  the  most  fundamental  duty  of  any  government, 
that  is,  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the  empire.  The  vast 
Disintegra-    ti'ansatlantic  possessions  of  Spain-  had  risen  in  revolt.      The 

.  ,  reasons  for  this  revolt,  which  presaged  the  downfall  of  the 

Spanish  .  .  , 

Empire.  proud  Spanish  Empire,  were:  the  continued  and  varied  mis- 
government  of  the  home  country  which  regarded  the  colonies 
as  simply  sources  of  wealth  to  be  ingeniously  exploited  for 
the  benefit  of  the  home  government,  the  taste  of  relative 
freedom  they  had  enjoyed  between  1810  and  1815  when  the 
home  government  was  otherwise  occupied,  the  example  of  the 
United  States  and  its  successful  war  of  independence,  and 
the  encouragement  of  England,  seeking  wider  markets. 
Ferdinand  could  probably  have  kept  his  empire  intact  had 
he  been  willing  to  make  the  concessions  demanded  by  the 
Americans,  larger  commercial  liberty  and  considerable 
political  autonomy.  This  he  would  not  do.  He  would  rule 
his  empire  as  it  had  always  been  ruled,  his  colonies  as  he 
ruled  the  mother  country.  The  result  was  revolution  from 
Mexico  to  the  southern  tip  of  South  America.  Ferdinand's 
task  was  to  reconquer  this  vast  region  by  force.  This  force 
he  did  not  have.  He  hoped  for  the  support  of  the  Holy 
Alliance,  which,  how^ever,  was  not  forthcoming.  He,  there- 
fore, was  thrown  upon  his  own  resources.  By  1819  he  had 
collected  an  army  of  over  twenty  thousand  men  at  Cadiz. 
Suddenly  the  army  rose  in  revolt  against  the  Government, 
and  the  first  of  those  revolutions  of  southern  Europe  against 
the  restored  monarchs  occurred. 


GROWTH  OF  THE  REVOLUTIONARY  SPIRIT     49 

With  singular  lack  of  perspicacity,  the  restored  Bourbons  Neglect    of 

of    Spain    had    neglected    or    insulted    the    army,    the    very         army 

^  .  .         .  .  and  the 

weapon    which    reaction    in    the    other    countries   of   Europe  navy. 

had  taken  every  means  to  conciliate  and  win.  Many  of  the 
ablest  officers  had  been  degraded ;  poor  rations,  poor  bar- 
racks, insufficient  pay,  in  arrears  at  that,  had  created  a  feel- 
ing of  deep  irritation  in  the  army,  which  became  the  breeding 
place  of  conspiracies,  the  real  revolutionary  element  in  the 
state.  The  navy,  too,  so  essential  for  the  preservation  of 
a  transoceanic  colonial  empire,  had  been  allowed  to  fall  into 
the  most  shameful  decay  until  it  consisted  of  but  little 
else  than  the  king's  own  pleasure  yachts.  The  officers  were 
utterly  poor.  The  only  relief  the  Government  granted  them 
was  permission  to  support  themselves  by  fishing. 

Under  such  conditions  military  outbreaks  were  natural. 
Insurrections  occurred  repeatedly,  in  1814,  1815,  1816,  1817, 
1818  and  1819.  The  failure  in  each  case  only  increased  the 
severity  with  which  the  Government  pursued  all  those  sus- 
pected of  liberalism.  In  1820  the  army  rose  again,  driven 
to  desperation  by  the  stories  of  horror  told  by  soldiers  re- 
turning from  America,  and  believing  that  they  were  about 
to  be  sent  to  certain  death. 

On  January  1,  1820,  Riego,  a  colonel  in  the  army,  pro-  Revolution 
claimed  the  Constitution  of  1812  and  led  a  few  troops  °^  ^^'^^• 
through  the  province  of  Andalusia,  endeavoring  to  arouse 
the  south  of  Spain.  He  was  unsuccessful.  His  force  grad- 
ually dwindled  away,  attracting  no  popular  support.  But 
it  had  served  its  purpose.  As  the  revolution  was  dying  out 
in  the  south  it  kindled  in  the  opposite  end  of  the  peninsula, 
under  the  Pyrenees  and  along  the  Ebro.  The  Constitution 
of  1812  was  proclaimed  there  and  the  flames  spread  eastward 
to  the  great  cities  of  Saragossa  and  Barcelona.  Shortly 
riots  broke  out  in  Madrid  itself.  The  King,  learning  that 
he  could  not  rely  upon  his  soldiers  even  in  his  capital,  and 
thoroughly  frightened,  yielded  to  the  demands  of  the  scat- 
tered  and   incoherent    revolution,    and   on    the    evening   of 


50  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

March  T,  1820,  proclaimed  tlie  Constitution  of  1812,  prom- 
ised to  maintain  it,  and  declared  that  he  would  harry  out  of 
the  country  those  who  would  not  support  it.  "  Let  us  ad- 
vance frankly,"  he  said,  "  myself  leading  the  way,  along  the 
constitutional  path."  The  text  of  the  Constitution  was 
posted  in  every  city,  and  parish  priests  were  ordered  to 
expound  it  to  their  congregations. 

Thus  revolution  had  triumphed  again,  and  only  five  years 
after  Waterloo.  An  absolute  monarchy,  based  on  divine 
right,  had  been  changed  into  a  constitutional  monarchy  based 
on  the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  Would  the  example  be 
followed  elsewhere.''  Would  the  Holy  Alliance  look  on  in 
silence  .-^  Had  the  revolutionary  spirit  been  so  carefully 
smothered  in  Austria,  Germany,  and  France,  only  to  blaze 
forth  in  outlying  sections  of  Europe.''  Answers  to  these 
questions  were  quickly  forthcoming. 

ITALY 

Napoleon  on      In  the  leisure  of  St.  Helena,  Napoleon  I  wrote,  concern- 
^^^^  ing  Italy:  "Italy  is  surrounded  by  the  Alps  and  the  sea. 

Her  natural  limits  are  defined  with  as  much  exactitude  as 
if  she  were  an  island.  Italy  is  only  united  to  the  continent 
by  one  hundred  and  fifty  leagues  of  frontier  and  these  one 
hundred  and  fifty  leagues  are  fortified  by  the  highest  barrier 
that  can  be  opposed  to  man.  Italy,  isolated  between  her 
natural  limits,  is  destined  to  form  a  great  and  powerful 
nation.  Italy  is  one  nation;  unity  of  language,  customs 
and  literature,  must,  within  a  period  more  or  less  distant, 
unite  her  inhabitants  under  one  sole  government.  And 
Rome  will,  without  the  slightest  doubt,  be  chosen  by  the 
Italians  as  their  capital."  ^ 

Napoleon  was  now  in  a  position  where  he  was  powerless 
to  aid  in  this  achievement,  even  had  he  been  so  disposed.  But 
the  time  was  very  fresh  in  men's  minds  when  they  believed 
that  the  great  commander  was  to  use  his  talent  and  oppor- 

^  Cesaresco,  The  Liberation  of  Italy,  3. 


NAPOLEON'S  INFLUENCE  UPON  ITALY   51 

tunity  to  give  them  unity  and  freedom.     He  had  not  done  so. 

Yet  in  a  very  real  sense  modern  Italy  began  under  his  empire. 

He  took  the  country  a  long  step  forward  toward  its  ideal. 

Napoleon's  activity  in  Italy  had  been  most  revolutionary.  Significance 

He  had   driven   all   the   native   princes   from   the   peninsula.  °      ,^^°" 

.  .  7  leon  s 

Only  the  kings  of  Naples  and  Piedmont  still  retamed  some  activity  in 

semblance  of  authority,  for  each  fortunately  had  an  island  Italy, 
to  which  he  could  flee,  whence  the  French  could  not  drive 
him,  as  the  British  controlled  the  sea.  The  former  spent 
several  years  in  Sicily,  the  latter  in  the  island  of  Sardinia. 
Napoleon  did  not  formally  unite  all  Italy,  but  he  annexed 
a  part  directly  to  the  French  Empire,  a  part  he  made  into  the 
Kingdom  of  Italy,  with  himself  as  King  and  his  step-son, 
Eugene  Beauharnais,  as  Viceroy,  and  the  remainder  consti- 
tuted the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  over  which  Murat,  brother-in- 
law  of  Napoleon,  ruled.  Thus,  though  there  was  not  unity, 
there  were  only  three  states  where  formerly  there  had  been  a 
dozen.  Yet,  in  an  important  sense,  there  was  unity,  for  it 
was  the  directingmind  of  the  French  Emperor  that  permeated 
and  largely  controlled  the  policy  of  all  three.  The  French  did 
much  for  the  regeneration  of  Italy.  They  abolished  feudalism, 
they  gave  uniform  and  enlightened  laws,  they  opened  careers  The 

to  talent,  they  stimulated  industry.     New  ideas,  political  and  awakening 

•  111  •       1        •  1      1  XI-  1  °^  Italy, 

social,  penetrated  the  penmsula  with  them.  Italians  hence- 
forth would  never  be  the  same  as  they  had  been.  Barriers, 
physical,  material,  intellectual,  had  been  thrown  down,  and 
could  never  be  permanently  set  up  again.  Of  course  there 
was  the  reverse.  The  burdens  imposed  in  the  place  of  those 
removed  were  heavy.  Napoleon  made  the  Italians  a  part 
of  his  general  European  system  and  forced  them  to  give 
freely  of  their  money  and  their  men  for  purposes  that  con- 
cerned them  only  slightly,  if  at  all.  Sixty  thousand  Italians 
perished  in  his  wars  in  Spain  and  Russia.  His  shameless 
robbery  of  their  works  of  art  gave  deep  offense.  His  treat- 
«Tient  of  the  Pope  wounded  many  in  their  religious  sensibilities, 
and  he  Ignored  the  national  sentiment  whenever   he   chose. 


52 


REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 


Yet  tlie  later  achievement  of  unity  and  liberty  was  made 
much  easier  because  Napoleon  had  passed  that  way.  He 
shook  the  country  out  of  its  century-old  somnolence.  Serv- 
ice in  his  armies  increased  the  strenuousness  of  the  Italians 
and  taught  them  the  art  of  war.  The  very  fact  that  they 
had  witnessed  and  participated  in  great  events  imparted  an 
unknown  energy  to  these  easy-going  sons  of  the  south. 
Napoleon  had  exiled  every  one  of  the  Italian  princes.  They 
might  be  restored,  but  their  prestige  was  irrevocably  gone. 
He  had  even  driven  the  Pope  from  his  states,  and  had 
abolished  the  temporal  power.  What  had  been  done  once 
might  perhaps  be  done  again.  There  had  been  for  a  few 
years  a  state  bearing  the  name  Kingdom  of  Italy.  The 
memory  of  that  fact  could  not  be  uprooted  by  all  the  mon- 
archs  of  Christendom.  It  was  an  augury  full  of  hope,  a 
beacon  pointing  the  sure  and  steadfast  way. 
The  decision  Of  all  this  the  Allies,  at  their  famous  Congress  of  Vienna, 
took  no  note.  They  were  playing  the  short  politics  of  the 
hour.  They  paid  no  attention  to  the  impalpable  forces  of 
the  human  spirit.  They  looked  upon  the  future  of  Italy 
as  a  matter  quite  at  their  disposal  and  they  reconstructed 
the  peninsula  without  asking  its  opinion  or  consent.  A 
people  numbering  more  than  seventeen  million  had  nothing 
to  say  about  its  own  fate.  The  mighty  men  of  Europe 
sitting  in  Vienna  considered  that  their  affair.  And  they 
arranged  it  by  returning  Italy  to  the  state  of  a  geograph- 
ical expression.  They  did  not  give  it  even  as  much  unity 
as  they  gave  Germany,  not  even  that  of  a  loose  confedera- 
tion. They  made  short  shrift  of  all  such  suggestions  and 
restored  most  of  the  old  states.  There  were  henceforth  ten 
of  them :  Piedmont,  Lombardy-Venetia,  Parma,  Modena, 
Lucca,  Tuscany,  the  Papal  States,  Naples,  Monaco,  and  San 
Marino.  Genoa  and  Venice,  until  recently  independent  re- 
publics, were  not  restored,  as  republics  were  not  "  fashion- 
able." The  one  was  given  to  Piedmont,  the  other  to  Austria, 
These  states  were  too   small  to  be  self-sufficient,   and   as 


of  the 

Congress    of 
Vienna. 


The  ten 

Italian 

states. 


LongifurU  Kasi  \2  from.  On 

■^-- --■:,■■  t   . 


AUSTRIA  DOMINATES  ITALY  53 

a  result  Italy  was  for  nearly  fifty  years  the  sport  of  for- 
eign powers,  dependent,  hencefortli,  not  upon  France  but 
upon  Austria.  This  is  the  cardinal  fact  in  the  situation  and 
is  an  evidence,  as  it  is  a  partial  cause,  of  the  commanding 
position  of  the  Austrian  monarchy  after  the  fall  of  Napo-  The  domi- 

leon.    Austria  was  given  outright  the  richest  part  of  the  Po  fiance  of 

.  .  Austria, 

valley  as  a  Lombardo-Venetian  kingdom.      Austrian  princes 

or  princesses  ruled  over  Modena,  Parma,  and  Tuscany,  and 

were  easily  brought  into   the  Austrian   system.     Thus  was 

Austria  the  master  of  northern  Italy ;  master  of  southern 

Italy,  too,  for  Ferdinand,  King  of  Naples,  made  an  offensive 

and    defensive    treaty    with    Austria,    pledging    himself    to 

make  no  separate  alliances  and  to  grant  no  liberties  to  his 

subjects    beyond    those    which    obtained    in    Lombardy    and 

Venetia.  Naples  was  thus  but  a  satellite  in  the  great  Austrian 

system.     The  King  of  Piedmont  and  the  Pope  were  the  only 

Italian  princes  at  all  likely  to  be  intractable.     And  Austria's 

strength    in    comparison   with    theirs    was   that   of   a    giant 

compared  with  that  of  a  pigmy. 

Thus  the  restoration  was  accomplished.  Italy  became 
again  a  collection  of  small  states,  largely  under  the  domi- 
nance of  Austria.  Each  of  the  restored  princes  was  an 
absolute  monarch.  In  none  of  the  states  was  there  a  parlia- 
ment. Italy  had  neither  unity  nor  constitutional  forms, 
nor  any  semblance  of  popular  participation  in  the  govern- 
ment. The  use  which  the  princes  made  of  their  unfettered 
liberty  of  action  was  significant. 

Of  these  several  states  the  four  most  important  were: 
the  Lombardo-Venetian  Kingdom,  the  Kingdom  of  Sardinia 
or  Piedmont,  the  Papal  States,  and  the  Kingdom  of  Naples. 

The  first  was  ruled  by  a  viceroy,  who  carried  out  orders  The 

received  from  Vienna.     It  paid  into  the  Austrian  treasury  I-ombardo- 

Venetian 
taxes  far  out  of  proportion  to  its  population  or  its  extent.  xirj_g.jQ_, 

Here  French  laws  were  largely  abrogated,  and  an  attempt 

was  made  to  make  the  people  forget  that  they  were  Italians, 

and  to  consider  themselves  Austrians.      Children  were  taught 


54  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

in  their  text-books  of  geograpliy  that  Lombardy  and  Venetia 
were  geographically  a  part  of  Austria.  Industries  were 
repressed  in  favor  of  Austrian  manufacturers.  Austrians 
were  appointed  to  the  university  professorships,  and  they  and 
their  students,  as  well  as  other  persons,  were  watched  by 
numerous  and  proficient  spies.  It  was  even  considered  nec- 
essary to  edit  Dante  that  he  might  be  read  with  safety. 
■^^^  The  King  of  Piedmont,  Victor  Emmanuel  I,  had  been  for 

Sardinia  iiiany  3rears  an  exile  in  the  island  of  Sardinia,  and  his  states 
had  been  annexed  by  Napoleon  to  France.  He  returned 
to  Turin  enraged  against  the  author  of  all  his  woes.  Say- 
ing jokingly  that  he  had  slept  fifteen  years,  he  resolved  that 
Piedmont  should  regard  the  interval  as  a  dream.  Most  of 
the  laws  and  institutions  introduced  by  France  were  abol- 
ished by  a  stroke  of  the  pen,  almost  the  only  ones  retained 
being  those  which  the  Piedmontese  would  gladly  have  seen 
go,  the  heaviest  taxes  and  the  police  system.  Most  of  those 
connected  with  the  government  and  the  army  during  the 
French  period  were  removed  from  their  positions,  thus  con- 
stituting at  the  outset  a  disaffected  class.  Religious  liberty 
was  narrowly  circumscribed;  political  liberty  did  not  exist, 
nor  did  liberty  of  education.  The  universities  were  shortly 
placed  under  the  control  of  the  Jesuits,  and  professors  and 
students  were  spied  upon.  Some  of  the  deeds  of  reaction 
were  so  absurd  as  to  become  classical  illustrations  of  the 
stupidity  of  the  restored  princes.  Gas  illumination  of  the 
Turin  theater  was  abandoned  because  it  had  been  introduced 
by  the  French.  French  plants  in  the  Botanic  Gardens  of 
Turin  were  torn  up,  French  furniture  in  the  royal  palaces 
destroyed,  and  a  certain  custom  house  official  would  let  no 
merchandise  be  brought  over  the  new  Napoleonic  road  over 
the  Mont  Cenis  pass,  lest  revolutionary  ideas  might  thus 
be  smuggled  in.  But,  however  unwise  and  retrogressive  this 
government  might  be,  it  followed  in  foreign  affairs  a  policy 
of  independence  of  Austrian  influence  as  far  as  this  was 
possible.     Piedmont  was  a  military  state,  having  an  army 


THE  PAPAL  STATES  55 

altogether  disproportionate  to  its  size.  Indeed,  three-fourths 
of  the  revenues  of  the  state  went  to  the  support  of  the  army 
and  navy. 

The  Papal  States  were  peculiar  among  the  governments  The  States 
of  Europe.  The  Pope  was  their  ruler.  The  Government  ^^  *^^ 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  priests.  Over  each  of  the  provinces 
and  legations  was  a  prelate.  All  the  higher  officials  were  of 
the  clergy.  The  laity  were  admitted  only  to  the  lower 
positions.  Taxes  were  high,  yet  papal  finances  were  badly 
disorganized,  and  the  Government  had  difficulty  in  meeting 
running  expenses.  An  important  source  of  income  of  this 
Christian,  priestly  state  was  the  lottery,  which  was  adminis- 
tered with  religious  ceremonies,  and  was  even  kept  running 
Sundays.  The  Government  could  not  even  assure  the  per- 
sonal safety  of  its  citizens.  Brigandage  was  rife, and  the  Pope 
was  forced  finally  to  make  a  formal  treaty  with  the  brigands, 
by  which  they  were  to  give  themselves  up  as  prisoners  for 
a  year,  after  which  they  were  to  be  pensioned.  Though 
bigoted  and  corrupt,  the  Government  had  a  keen  scent  for 
the  evils  of  the  French  regime.  It  repealed  most  of  the 
French  laws,  and  even  forbade  vaccination  and  gas  illumina- 
tion, as  odious  reminders  of  that  people.  The  police  were 
numerous  and  vexatious,  paying  particular  attention  to  what 
one  of  their  documents  characterized  as  "  the  class  called 
thinkers."  The  Inquisition  was  restored  and  judicial  torture 
revived.  Education  was  controlled  by  the  clergy.  Even  in 
the  universities  most  of  the  professors  were  ecclesiastics  and 
the  curriculum  was  carefully  purged  of  all  that  might  be 
dangerous.  This  excluded,  among  other  subjects,  modern 
literature  and  political  economy.  Niebuhr,  the  German  his- 
torian, thus  recorded  his  impression  of  that  state:  "  No  land 
of  Italy,  perhaps  of  Europe,  excepting  Turkey,  is  ruled  as  is 
this  ecclesiastical  state."     Rome  was  called  "  a  city  of  ruins, 

both  material  and  moral."  ^ 

T        1  1  .  7  .  .  Kingdom   of 

In    the    south,    covermg    three-eighths    of   the    peninsula,  the  Two 

was  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  or  the  Two  Sicilies.     The  king,  Sicilies, 


56 


REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 


Universal 
reaction. 


The 
Carbonari. 


Ferdinand  I,  was  of  the  Spanish  Bourbon  line.  He  was 
incredibly  ignorant,  and  in  character  detestable.  Return- 
ing from  Sicily,  however,  he  did  not  imitate  his  contempo- 
raries by  abolishing  everything  French.  "  Civil  institu- 
tions," says  a  recent  historian,  "  had  advanced  four  cen- 
turies in  the  nine  years  of  French  rule."  ^  But  while  in  theory 
much  of  the  work  of  those  years  was  allowed  to  remain,  in 
practice  the  Government  wa,s  hopelessly  corrupt.  The  King's 
treatment  of  the  army  was  such  as  to  raise  up  in  it  many 
enemies  to  his  power.  Many  who  had  served  under  Murat 
were  cashiered.  Whipping  was  restored,  which  angered  the 
common  soldier.  Thus  there  grew  up  rapidly  a  military 
faction  ripe  for  revolt. 

Obviously  the  policy  of  the  various  princes,  as  just  de- 
scribed, made  many  enemies :  all  the  progressive  elements  of 
the  population  who  believed  in  freedom  in  education,  in  relig- 
ion, in  business,  and  who  saw  special  privileges  restored, 
obsolete  commercial  regulations  revived,  arbitrary  and  igno- 
rant government  substituted  for  the  freer  and  more  intelli- 
gent administration  of  the  French ;  and  all  those  thrown  out 
of  employment  in  the  civil  service  or  the  army.  The  malcon- 
tents joined  the  Carbonari,  a  secret  society  which  first  rose 
in  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  spreading  thence  over  Italy  and 
to  other  European  countries.  Their  weapons  were  con- 
spiracy and  insurrection.  In  a  country  where  no  parlia- 
ments, no  political  parties,  no  public  agitation  for  political 
ends  were  permitted,  such  activity  was  necessarily  driven 
into  secret  channels.  The  Carbonari  had  an  elaborate  but 
loose  and  ineffective  organization.  Their  rules  and  forms 
were  frequently  childish  and  absurd.  Their  purposes  were 
not  clear  or  definite.  They  were  a  vast  liberal  organiza- 
tion much  better  adapted  for  spasmodic  movements  of  de- 
struction than  for  the  construction  of  new  institutions. 
Into  this  society  poured  the  dissatisfied  of  every  class.  It 
was  a  revolutionary  leaven  working  in  Italian  society,  spread- 

'  King,  History  of  Italian  Unity,  I,  87. 


REVOLUTION  IN  NAPLES  57 

ing  abroad  a  hatred  of  the  restored  princes,  a  desire  for 
change. 

Among  a  people  living  under  such  depressing  conditions  The 
the  news  of  the  successful  and  bloodless  Spanish  Revolution    ^  ,„„^ 

^  of  1820 

«f  1820  spread  quickly.  It  was  the  spark  to  the  tinder,  in  Naples. 
In  Naples  a  military  insurrection  broke  out,  of  such  apparent 
strength  that  the  King  yielded  at  once.  The  revolutionists 
demanded  the  Spanish  Constitution  of  1812,  not  because  they 
knew  much  about  it  save  that  it  was  very  democratic  but  be- 
cause it  possessed  the  advantage  of  being  ready-made.  The 
King  conceded  the  demand,  saying  that  he  would  have  been 
glad  to  have  granted  a  constitution  before  had  he  only 
known  there  was  a  general  desire  for  one.  He  was  appar- 
ently as  enthusiastic  as  were  the  revolutionists.  He  went  out 
of  his  way  to  show  this  in  a  most  extraordinary  fashion. 
On  July  13,  1820,  having  heard  mass  in  the  royal  chapel, 
he  approached  the  altar,  took  the  oath,  and  then,  fixing  his 
eyes  upon  the  cross,  he  added  of  his  own  accord,  "  Omni- 
potent God,  who  with  infinite  penetration  lookest  into  the 
heart  and  into  the  future,  if  I  lie,  or  if  I  should  one  day  be 
faithless  to  m}'  oath,  do  Thou  at  this  instant  annihilate 
me."  It  seemed  as  if  the  era  of  constitutional  government 
had  come  for  more  than  a  third  of  Italy. 

THE  CONGRESSES 

Thus  in  1820  the  Revolution,  so  hateful  to  the  diplomats 
of  1815,  had  resumed  the  offensive.  Spain  and  Naples  had 
overthrown  the  regime  that  had  been  in  force  five  years, 
and  had  adopted  constitutions  that  were  thorouglily  saturated 
with  the  principles  and  mechanism  of  Revolutionary  France. 
There  had  likewise  been  a  revolution  against  the  established 
regime  in  Portugal.  There  was  shortly  to  be  one  in  Pied- 
mont. 

A  matter  of  greater  importance  than  the  attitude  of 
these  peoples  toward  their  governments  was  that  of  the 
governments   toward  the  peoples.      The  powers   had  united 


68 


REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 


prepare  to 
suppress 
these    revo- 
lutions. 


The  powers  to  put  down  Napoleon.  They  had  then  taken  every  precau- 
tion to  check  the  activity  of  so-called  French  principles. 
They  had  been  in  the  main  successful,  but  now  those  principles 
were  asserting  themselves  triumphantly  in  outlying  parts  of 
Europe.  It  had  been  thought  that  future  trouble  would 
come  from  France;  but,  instead,  it  was  coming  from  Spain 
and  Italy. 

Metternich,  the  most  influential  personage  in  Europe, 
had  very  clear  views  of  the  requirements  of  the  situation. 
"  The  malady,"  as  he  called  it,  the  unrest  of  the  times,  was 
not  local  or  peculiar  to  one  part  of  Europe,  to  any  single 
country.  To  suppress  this  malady  the  Great  Coalition  had 
been  built  up  which,  after  endless  suffering  and  sacrifice, 
had  overcome  it,  though  it  had  not  extirpated  it.  What 
it  had  cost  so  much  to  check,  must  be  kept  in  check.  The 
vitality  of  these  subversive  revolutionary  principles  was  evi- 
dent to  all.  Energetic  measures  were  necessary  and,  to  be 
successful,  they  must  be  applied  everywhere  and  at  all  times. 
If  a  monarch  in  one  state  yielded  to  revolution  the  effects 
were  not  limited  to  that  state  or  that  monarch,  but  the 
revolutionary  parties  everywhere  were  encouraged  and  the 
stability  of  every  throne,  of  the  established  order  everywhere, 
was  threatened.  This  was  conspicuously  shown  by  the  recent 
events.  A  revolution  in  Spain  encourages  a  revolution  in 
Naples.  The  movement  may  spread  northward  sympa- 
thetically, may  reach  the  Italian  possessions  of  Austria,  may 
reach  Austria  itself,  France,  and  the  other  countries,  and  the 
world,  supposed  to  have  been  quieted  at  Vienna,  will  riot 
once  more  in  anarchy.  Metternich  thus  showed  that  no  state 
can  in  the  modern  age  lead  an  isolated  life.  The  life  of 
Europe  henceforth  must  be  collective  and  anything  that 
threatens  its   peace  is   a   very   proper   subject   for   the  dis- 

The  cussion  of  Europe,  collected  in  congresses. 

doctrine  of        Metternich  in  this  way  developed  the  doctrine  of  the  "  right 
...  of  intervention,"   a  doctrine  new   in   international   law,   yet 

vention.        one  to  which  he  succeeded  in  giving  great  vitality  for  many 


THE  CONGRESSES  59 

years.  The  doctrine  was  that,  as  modem  Europe  was  based 
upon  opposition  to  revolution,  the  powers  had  the  right 
and  were  in  duty  bound  to  intervene  to  put  down  revolution 
not  only  in  their  own  states  respectively  but  in  any  state 
of  Europe,  against  the  will  of  the  people  of  that  state,  even 
against  the  will  of  the  sovereign  of  th'at  state,  in  the  inter- 
ests of  the  established  monarchical  order.  A  change  of 
government  within  a  given  state  was  not  a  domestic  but 
an  international  affair. 

This  doctrine  did  not  originate  in  1820.      The  principle  The  Con- 
was  clearly  laid  down  in  the  treaty  of  Quadruple  Alliance  &^^^^  °^ 
of   1815    as   far   as    France   was    concerned.       It   had   been  chapelle 
elaborated    at    the    Congress    of    Aix-la-Chapelle    in    1818.  1818. 
There  the  five  Great  Powers  had  declared  their  purpose  to 
maintain    the    general    peace    which    was    "  founded    on    a 
religious    respect    for    the    engagements    contained    in    the 
Treaties,  and  for  the  whole  of  the  rights  resulting  therefrom." 
The  phrase  was  vague  because  the  powers  could  not  agree 
on  anything  more  definite.     How  much  did  it  mean  or  might 
it  be  made  to  mean.''    Would  revolutionary  movements  in  any 
country  be  considered  as  justifying  intervention  in  the  in- 
terests of  the  sacred  treaties  .f^     The  opportunity  to  test  the 
matter  had  now  arisen.      Metternich,  as  usual,  was  quite  equal 
to  the  occasion.   A  congress  was  called  at  Troppau  to  consider  The  Con- 
the  affairs  of  the  Kingdom  of  Naples.     Austria, Russia, Prus-  S^^^^^  °^ 
sia,  France,  and  England  were  represented.     Unanimity  was  .q„q      ' 
lacking  but  there  was  a  majority  for  the  ominous  principle. 
The    three   eastern    powers,   Russia,    Prussia,    and    Austria, 
absolute   monarchies,   now    formally    accepted    the    principle 
of  intervention  as  laid  down  by  Metternich.      They  would 
refuse  to  recognize  as  legal  changes  brought  about  in  any 
state  by  revolution,  even  if  the  king  of  that  state  himself 
consented.      They  asserted  their  right  to  intervene  to  over- 
throw any  such  changes,  first  by  using  conciliatory  methods, 
then  by  using   force.      This   probably   meant  an   immediate 
armed  intervention  wherever  and  whenever  revolution  might 


60  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

break  out.  And  the  right  so  to  intervene  was  held  to  be 
imphcit  in  the  treaties  of  1815  on  which  the  European 
system  rested.  From  this  view  England  dissented  vigorously, 
declaring  that  in  her  opinion  the  powers  by  those  treaties 
intended  to  guarantee  to  each  other  only  their  territorial 
possessions,  not  at  all  their  form  of  government.  That 
was  a  domestic  concern.  England  and  France,  though 
not  signing  the  new  declaration,  remained,  however, 
merely  passive  and  the  absolute  monarchies  had  their 
way. 
The  Con-  Having  established  the  principle  the   Congress   next   de- 

T^^r  °-h         cided  to  apply  it  to  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,     They  accord- 
1821.  iwgly  adjouraed  to  Laibach,  inviting  the  King  of  Naples  to 

meet  them  there.  The  Neapolitan  Parliament  was  opposed 
to  letting  him  leave  the  kingdom  and  only  finally  consented 
after  he  had  again  sworn  to  the  constitution,  and  had  with 
facile  duplicity  declared  that  he  wished  to  go  solely  to  inter- 
cede for  his  people  and  "  to  obtain  the  sanction  of  the  powers 
for  the  newly  acquired  liberties."  Falsehoods  with  Ferdinand 
I  were  redundant  and  superfluous.  "  I  declare  to  you,"  he 
said,  "  and  to  my  nation  that  I  will  do  everything  to  leave  my 
people  in  the  possession  of  a  wise  and  free  constitution." 
Parliament,  deceived  by  the  royal  mendacity,  permitted  him 
to  go.  No  sooner  was  he  out  of  his  realm  than  he  retracted 
all  his  promises  and  oaths  and  appealed  to  the  Allies  to 
restore  him  to  absolute  power,  which  was  precisely  what 
they  had  already  determined  to  do.  Austria  was  commis- 
sioned to  send  an  army  into  the  kingdom.  It  did  so.  The 
opposition  of  the  Neapolitans  was  ineff^ective  and  Ferdinand 
was  restored  to  absolutism  by  foreigners  in  1821.  He  broke 
his  return  journey  at  Florence  in  order  to  make  the  amende 
honorable  to  a  probably  outraged  Deity  by  placing  a  votive 
lamp  in  the  Church  of  the  Annunciation. 

The  political  results  were  for  the  Neapolitans  most  de- 
plorable. The  reaction  that  ensued  was  unrestrained.  Hun- 
dreds were  imprisoned,  exiled,  executed.      Arbitrary  govern- 


REVOLUTION  IN  PIEDMONT  61 

ment  of  the  worst  kind  was  henceforth  meted  out  to  this 
unfortunate  kingdom. 

Just  as  this  NeapoHtan  revolution  was  being  snuffed  out 
an  insurrection  blazed  forth  at  the  opposite  end  of  the 
peninsula,  in  Piedmont.  The  causes  of  this  movement  were 
discontent  at  the  stupid  reaction  of  the  last  five  years,  the 
desire  for  constitutional  government,  and  dislike  of  Austria. 
The  insurgents  were  led  to  believe  that  they  would  have  the 
support  of  Charles  Albert,  Prince  of  Carignan,  head  of  a 
younger  branch  of  the  royal  family  and  heir  presumptive 
to  the  crown,  as  his  relations  with  Liberals  were  known  to 
be  intimate.  His  political  importance  was  considered  great 
owing  to  his  nearness  to  the  throne.  As  the  king,  Victor 
Emmanuel  I,  had  no  son,  the  crown  would  upon  his  death  pass 
to  his  brother,  Charles  Felix,  and  upon  the  latter's  death, 
he,  too,  being  without  direct  heir,  Charles  Albert  would  him- 
self become  king. 

The  Piedmontese  revolution  broke  out  in  Alessandria  on  The 

March  10,  1821.      The  revolutionists  demanded  the  Spanish  Revolution 

Constitution  and  war  against  Austria  as  the  great  enemy  ^.  , 

o  ^  b  J  Piedmont. 

of  Piedmont  and  of  Italy.  The  King  wavered  for  several 
days.  He  did  not  wish  a  civil  war,  Piedmontese  fighting 
Piedmontese,  which  would  surely  come  if  he  should  refuse 
the  demands  and  attempt  to  put  down  the  movement.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  knew  that  if  he  should  grant  those  demands, 
the  powers  would  intervene  to  suppress  constitutionalism 
here  as  they  had  done  in  Naples  and  his  promises  wovdd  have 
been  in  vain.  Unable  to  decide  between  the  cruel  alternatives 
of  civil  war  or  foreign  intervention  and  conquest,  and  dis- 
covering no  other  course  to  follow,  he  abdicated  on  March 
13,  in  favor  of  his  brother  Charles  Felix.  As  the  latter 
was  not  in  Piedmont  at  the  time,  Charles  Albert  was  ap- 
pointed regent,  until  his  arrival.  Charles  Albert,  therefore, 
exercised  the  royal  power  for  the  moment  and  in  a  manner 
favorable  to  the  revolutionists.  He  allowed  the  Spanish 
Constitution  to  be  proclaimed  from  the  royal  palace  in  Turin 


62  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

"  with    such    modifications    as    His    Majesty,    in    agreement 

with   the  national   representation,  shall  consider   advisable." 

The   new   King   shortly   disavowed   these   concessions.      The 

whole  imbroglio  was  cut  short  by  the  action  of  the  powers. 

An  Austrian  army  was  already  on  the  borders  and  a  hundred 

thousand  Russians  were  ordered  forward  from  Galicia.      The 

revolutionists    clashed   at   Novara   with   an    army    composed 

of  Austrians  and  Piedmontese  loyal  to  the  King.     They  were 

easily  routed  and  the  revolution  was  over.       Charles  Felix, 

an  absolutist  king,  was  upon  the  throne,  and  Austria  had 

again  shown  her  resolution  and  her  power.     Once  more  the 

demand  for  constitutional  freedom  had  been  suppressed,  once 

more  Metternich  had  triumphed. 

Reasons  for      Thus   both    the    Italian  movements    for  a    freer   political 

.  ,,  life  had  ended  in   disaster.     The   reasons   for  their  failure 

of  tne 

movements  are  instructive  and  are  important  for  an  understanding  of  the 
of  1820.  Italian  problem.  The  Neapolitan  revolution  failed  because 
of  the  European  coalition  forbidding  its  success,  because 
of  the  treachery  of  the  King,  because  of  the  illiberal  treat- 
ment of  Sicily  by  the  revolutionists.  That  of  Piedmont 
failed  because  it  was  the  work  of  a  small  clique,  had  no 
broad  basis  of  appeal  to  the  people,  lacked  leadership  and 
definite  aims,  neglected  details,  and  also  because  of  the 
opposition  of  the  powers. 

Thus  two  revolutions  had  been  overcome  and  the  system 
of  the  Congress  of  Vienna  preserved  in   Italy.     There  re- 
mained the  more  remote  problem  of  Spain.      The  principle 
there,  however,  was  the  same  and  the  Allies  felt  obliged  to 
The  Con-      assert  it.      This  was  the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Verona. 

gress   of        The  revolution  in   Spain  was  still  triumphant.     The  King 
VcroHR 

and  the  reactionary  parties  could  not  by  their  own  strength 

regain  their  old  position.      They  appealed  to  the  allied  mon- 

archs  and  by  1822  they,  thoroughly  committed  to  the  policy 

involved,  decided  at  the  Congress  of  Verona,  that  Russia, 

Austria,  Prussia,  and  France,  should  send  to  their  ministers 

in  Madrid  identical  notes  demanding  the  immediate  restora- 


INTERVENTION  IN  SPAIN  63 

tion  of  Ferdinand  VII  to  the  fulness  of  his  powers.  In  the 
event  of  the  expected  refusal  the  ministers  should  quit  Madrid 
and  war  should  be  declared.  England  opposed  this  policy 
with  high  indignation,  but  in  vain.  France,  now  a  thor- 
oughly reactionary  country,  was  commissioned  to  carry  out 
the  work  of  restoring  Ferdinand.  The  Spaniards  refused 
to  accede  to  the  demand  of  the  powers,  and  in  April  1823 
a  French  army  of  a  hundred  thousand  under  the  Duke  of 
Angouleme,  heir  presumptive  to  the  French  throne,  crossed 
the  Pyrenees.  The  Spanish  Government  had  no  army  and 
no  money  and  could  not  oppose  the  advance  of  the  invaders 
with  any  vigor.  The  French  spent  six  months  in  traversing 
the  peninsula  from  north  to  south,  meeting  no  serious  resist- 
ance. The  Cortes  retired  from  Madrid  to  Cadiz  before  the 
invaders,  taking  the  King  with  them.  The  siege  of  Cadiz 
was  now  begun.  The  war  was  soon  over  with  the  seizure 
of  the  fort  of  the  Trocadero  and  Ferdinand  was  back  upon 
his  absolute  throne,  by  act  of  France,  supported  by  the 
Holy  Alliance. 

There  now  began  a  period  of  odious  reaction.  All  the  Reaction  in 
acts  passed  by  the  Cortes  since  1820  were  annulled.  An  ^^^^' 
organization  called  the  "  Society  of  the  Exterminating 
Angel  "  began  a  mad  hunt  for  Liberals,  throwing  them  into 
prison,  shooting  them  down.  The  war  of  revenge  knew  no 
bounds.  "  Juntas  of  purification  "  helped  it  on.  Thou- 
sands were  driven  from  the  country,  hundreds  were  executed. 
The  French  Government,  ashamed  of  its  protege,  endeavored 
to  stop  the  savagery,  but  with  slight  success.  It  is  an  odious 
chapter  in  the  history  of  Spain. 

The  Holy  Alliance  by  these  triumphs  in  Naples,  Piedmont,  The 

and  Spain,  showed  itself  the   dominant  force   in   European  t"^™P^ 

.  .    of  the  Holy 

pohtics.      The  system,  named  after  Metternich,  because  his  ^uiance, 

diplomacy  had  built  it  up  and  because  he  stood  in  the  very 

center  of  it,  seemed  firmly  established  as  the  European  system. 

But  it  had  achieved  its  last  notable  triumph.      It  was  now 

to  receive  a  series  of  checks  that  were  to  limit  it  forever. 


6t  REVOLUTION  IN  SPAIN  AND  ITALY 

Against  the  decisions  of  the  congresses  we  have  passed  iu 
review,  one  power,  England,  had  protested,  though  to  no 
effect.  England's  prestige  had  steadily  declined  since  the 
Congress  of  Vienna.  The  three  eastern  powers  simply  filed 
her  protests  against  their  intentions  in  their  archives,  paying 
no  further  heed.  England,  which  had  driven  the  French 
out  of  Spain  ten  years  before,  now  saw  them  coming  in  again, 
this  time  with  ease  and  success.  As  England's  influence 
abroad  decreased  the  wrath  of  Englishmen  grew,  and  with 
the  advent  of  Canning  to  the  cabinet  England  delivered  some 
swift  blows  in  retaliation,  showing  that  she  was  still  a  power 
to  be  reckoned  with.  It  was,  of  course,  useless  for  her  to 
think  of  opposing  the  three  great  military  monarchies  by 
arms.  But  the  contest  between  her  and  them  vv^as  now 
removed  to  a  field  where  her  authority  would  unquestionably 
prove  decisive. 

Having  restored  the  King  of  Spain  to  absolute  power, 
the  next  wish  of  the  Holy  Alliance  was  to  restore  to  Spain, 
and  thus  to  monarchy,  the  revolted  Spanish-American  colonies. 
England  let  it  be  known  that  she  would  oppose  any  steps 
having  this  end  in  view,  save  those  of  the  Spaniards  them- 
selves, and,  as  she  controlled  the  sea,  her  declaration  virtually 
was  that  she  would  keep  the  Holy  Alliance  restricted  to 
the  continent  of  Europe  and  would  prevent  it  from  sending 
ships  and  troops  to  the  scene  of  the  revolt.  She  sought 
and  received  the  co-operation  of  the  United  States  in  this 
purpose,  though  no  alliance  was  formed  and  each  power 
acted  independently.  The  United  States  had  approved  the 
secession  of  the  countries  to  the  south  of  her,  so  plainly  to 
her  advantage  and  so  evidently  in  imitation  of  her  example. 
This  Government  had  also  in  1819  virtually  forced  Spain 
to  cede  Florida,  hitherto  a  Spanish  possession.  And  now, 
just  after  the  close  of  the  successful  French  invasion  and 
the  restoration  of  Ferdinand,  the  President  of  the  United 
The  Monroe  States,  James  Monroe,  in  a  message  to  Congress  destined 
Doctrine.       |.q  become  one  of  the  most  famous  documents  ever  written 


THE  MONROE  DOCTRINE  65 

in  the  White  House,  gave  emphatic  notice  to  the  Holy 
AlHance  of  the  attitude  this  country  would  assume  in  case 
it  should  endeavor  to  win  back  her  colonies  for  Spain,  should 
Spain  herself  be  unable  to  do  so.  We  should  consider  any 
attempt  on  the  part  of  these  absolute  monarchies  of  Europe 
"  to  extend  their  system  to  any  portion  of  this  hemisphere 
as  dangerous  to  our  peace  and  safety,"  and  we  could  not 
view  any  interposition  for  the  purpose  of  oppressing  the 
South  American  states  "  or  controlling  in  any  other  manner, 
their  destiny,  by  any  European  power,  in  any  other  light 
than  as  the  manifestation  of  an  unfriendly  disposition  to- 
wards the  United  States."  These  suggestions  from  England 
and  the  United  States  were  sufficient  to  prevent  the  sum- 
moning of  any  new  congress  to  consider  the  reconquest  of 
America  and  thus  to  add  new  laurels  to  the  Holy  Alliance. 
The  doctrine  of  intervention  had  reached  its  high  water 
mark  as  applied  to  the  interests  of  reaction,  had  received 
an  emphatic  defiance — a  defiance  made  the  more  resounding 
by  the  recognition  shortly  by  England  and  the  United  States 
of  the  independence  of  the  South  American  republics.  Aus- 
tria, Russia,  and  Prussia  protested  against  a  course  which 
"  tended  to  encourage  that  revolutionary  spirit  it  had  been 
found  so  difficult  to  control  in  Europe."  Canning  proudly 
said,  "  We  have  called  in  the  New  World  to  redress  the 
balance  of  the  Old."  On  the  other  hand,  Metternich's 
opinion  of  Canning  was  that  he  was  a  "  malevolent  meteor 
hurled  by  an  angry  Providence  upon  Europe." 

The  Metternich  system,  thus  checked,  was  to  receive  before  The 

long  a  series  of  blows  from  which  it  never  recovered,  in  the  *  Matter- 

iiicli  svs^ 
overthrow  of  the  restored  Bourbons  in  France,  in  the  Belgian  ^^^  „ 

revolution  of  1830,  and,  in  a  certain  way,  in  the  Greek  war  checked. 

of  independence. 


CHAPTER  IV 
FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  XVIII 

The  pro-  No  country  in  Europe  had  undergone  between  1789  and 

.    ^      ^  '      1815    so    sweeping   and   so   vital   a    transformation    as    had 
fects  of  the  . 

French  France,  the  birthplace  of  the  Revolution  and  still  the  home 

Revolution,  of  its  unrealized  ideals.  Institutions,  feelings,  aspirations, 
mental  outlook  of  a  kind  quite  new  in  Europe,  had  been 
adopted  by  millions  of  Frenchmen  as  a  new  evangel.  Much 
had  been  irrevocably  destroyed  by  the  Revolution,  much  had 
been  created,  much  had  been  merely  sketched.  It  remained 
for  the  nineteenth  century  to  fill  in  this  outline.  The  old 
form  of  society  to  which  France  had  been  accustomed  for 
centuries  was  gone  and  a  type  new  to  Europe,  of  immense 
proselj'tizing  power,  had  been  unfolded.  The  old  had  been 
one  of  pri^^leged  classes.  The  new  Avas  democratic.  The 
three  great  institutions,  agencies  of  the  privileged  few,  which 
had  long  weighed  down  with  paralyzing  effect  upon  the  mass 
of  Frenchmen,  the  monarchy,  the  nobilit}'^,  and  the  church,  had 
been  brought  into  subjection  to  the  people,  had  been  weak- 
ened immeasurably  as  controlling  forces  in  the  life  of  modern 
France.  France  had  made  a  passionate  effort  to  free  her- 
self from  all  forms  of  aristocracy,  temporal  and  ecclesiast- 
ical. France  in  1815  was  by  far  the  most  democratic  coun- 
try in  Europe,  in  her  feelings,  her  thoughts,  her  customs, 
and  her  institutions. 

These  changes  had,  however,  not  been  brought  about  by 
the  unanimous  consent  of  the  French  people.  The  old  privi- 
leged classes  were,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  sworn 
enemies  of  the  new  order  which  had  been   erected  at  their 

66 


THE  RESTORATION  OF  THE  BOURBONS   67 

expense,  and  it  was  precisely  because  men  were  not  agreed 

as  to  the  permanence  of  the  principles  and  decisions  of  the 

Revolution  that  the  contest  between  the  adherents  of  the  old 

and  the  supporters  of  the  new  was  to  be  carried  over  into 

the  new  era,  and  indeed  still  continues.     The  war  of  opinions 

which  began  with  the  Revolution  was  not  ended  in  1795  or 

in  1815,  nor  has  it  entirely  ended  yet,  for  the  reason  that 

not  all  Frenchmen  have  at  any  time  been  ready  to  accept 

the  present  fact,  the  status  quo,  but  have  tried  repeatedly  to 

re-open  the  discussion,  and  to  modify,  if  not  to  reverse,  the 

decision.      This   warfare  is   the  warp   and  woof  of  French 

history  in  the  nineteenth  century. 

One  thing,  however,  was  settled  at  the  outset.     The  old  The 

regime  was  not  to  be  restored.     The  Bourbons  recovered  the  restoration 

right  to  rule  only  on  condition  that  their  monarchy  should  be  Bourbons 

a  constitutional  one.       The  Allies   who,  as  the  phrase  ran,  not  a 

had   "  brought   back   the   Bourbons    in   their   baggage,"   in-  restoration 

sisted  on  tliis,  believing  it  the  only  means  of  assuring"  the    ,   . 

^  o  J  &  regime. 

continuance  of  their  rule,  and  Louis  XVIII,  rather  than 
have  a  constitution  forced  upon  him  by  the  representatives 
of  the  French  people,  granted  one  himself.  This  procedure 
had  the  manifest  advantage  for  him  that  he  did  not  appear 
to  receive  his  throne  from  the  people  on  conditions  imposed 
by  them,  that  he  did  not  at  all  recognize  the  revolutionary 
principle  of  popular  sovereignty,  that  he  appeared  to  rule 
solely  by  right  of  birth,  by  divine  right,  as  had  his  ancestors. 
In  the  plenitude  of  his  powers  he  would  graciously  grant 
certain  privileges  to  his  people.  The  monarchical  principle 
would  remain  unblemished.  Consequently,  on  his  first  return 
to  France  in  1814,  he  issued  the  most  famous  document  con-  The  Con- 
nected with  his  name,  the  Constitutional  Charter,  which,  ^titutional 
suspended  later  during  the  Hundred  Days,  was  revived  in 
1815  and  remained  in  force  until  1848,  under  three  kings, 
Louis  XVIII  (1815-1824),  Charles  X  (1824-1830),  and 
Louis  Philippe  (1830-1848),  only  altered  in  some  details 
in  1830  as  a  result  of  the  revolution  of  that  year. 


68         FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

The  form  of  By  tliis  act  the  King  decreed  tliat  his  own  person  should 
government,  j^g  inviohible,  tliat  his  ministers  might  be  impeached  by  the 
chambers,  that  he  alone  should  possess  all  executive  power, 
that  he  should  command  the  army  and  navy,  declare  war, 
make  treaties,  and  appoint  to  all  positions  in  the  public 
services ;  that  the  legislative  power  should  be  exercised  by 
himself  and  a  legislature  consisting  of  two  houses,  a  Cham- 
ber of  Peers  and  a  Chamber  of  Deputies ;  that  the  king  alone 
should  propose  all  laws ;  that  they  then  should  be  discussed 
by  the  chambers  and  accepted  or  rejected  according  to  their 
desire,  but  not  amended  save  with  his  consent.  If  he  should 
not  propose  a  law  desired  by  the  chambers  they  might  peti- 
tion him  to  do  so  and  might  suggest  the  provisions  they 
would  like  to  see  it  contain,  but  if  the  king  should  reject 
tliis  petition  it  should  not  be  again  presented  during  the  same 
session.  No  tax  could  be  levied  without  the  consent  of  the 
chambers. 
A  restricted  The  Chamber  of  Peers  was  to  be  appointed  by  the  king 
suffrage.  ^^j,  wf^^  qj.  fQj.  hereditary  transmission,  as  he  might  see  fit. 
Its  sessions  were  to  be  secret.  The  Chamber  of  Deputies  was 
to  consist  of  representatives  chosen  for  a  period  of  five  years. 
The  suffrage  was  carefully  restricted  by  an  age  and  prop- 
erty qualification.  Only  those  who  were  at  least  thirty  years 
of  age  and  paid  at  least  three  hundred  francs  in  direct 
taxes  should  have  the  right  to  vote  for  deputies,  and  only 
those  were  eligible  to  become  deputies  who  were  forty  ^^ears 
of  age  or  over  and  paid  a  direct  tax  of  at  least  one  thousand 
francs.  These  provisions  were  very  favorable  to  the  wealthy. 
Indeed,  they  made  the  chamber  a  plutocratic  body;  There 
were  less  than  100,000  voters  in  France  out  of  a  population 
of  29,000,000,  and  not  more  than  12,000  were  eligible  to 
become  deputies. 

The  Charter  proclaimed  the  equality  of  all  Frenchmen, 
yet  only  a  petty  minority  were  given  the  right  to  participate 
in  the  government  of  the  country.  France  was  still  in  a 
political  sense   a   land  of   privilege,   only   privilege   was   no 


THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  CHARTER  69 

longer  based  on  birth  but  on  fortune.       Nevertheless,   this 

was    a    more    liberal    form    of    government    than    she    had 

ever  had  under  Napoleon,  and  was  the  most  liberal  to  be 

seen  in  Europe,  outside  of  England.      The  number  of  voters 

and  of  those  eligible  as  deputies  increased  with  the  increase 

of  wealth.      The  influence  of  English  example  is  apparent 

in  many  of  the  provisions  of  the  Charter. 

There  was  another  set  of  provisions  in  this  document  of  Provisions 

even  greater  importance  than  those  determining  the  future  concerning 

form  of  government,  namely,  that  in  which  the  civil  rights  rights. 

of  Frenchmen  were  narrated.       These  provisions   show  how 

much  of  the  work  of  the  Revolution  and  of  Napoleon  the 

Bourbons  were  prepared  to  accept.     They  were  intended  to 

reassure  the   people  of  France,   who   feared   to   see   in   the 

Restoration  a  loss  of  liberties  or  rights  which  had  become 

most  precious  to  them.     They  were  thus  intended  to  win  for 

the  restored  monarchy  a  popular  support  and  a  guarantee 

of  permanence  it  thus  far  lacked.     It  was  declared  that  all 

Frenchmen  were  equal  before  the  law,  whatever  their  titles 

or  rank,  and  thus  the  cardinal  principle  of  the  Revolution 

was   preserved;   that   all   were   equally   eligible   to   civil   and 

military    positions,    that    thus    no   class    should    monopolize 

public  service,  as  had  largely  been  the  case  before  the  Revolu-  Recognition 

tion ;   that   no   one  should   be   arrested  or   prosecuted   save  °      ^ 

,1/.,.  work  of  the 

by    due   process    of    law,    that    thus    the    day   of    arbitrary  Revolution. 

imprisonment  was  not  to  return ;  that  there  should  be  com- 
plete religious  freedom  for  all  sects,  though  Roman  Cathol- 
icism was  declared  to  be  the  religion  of  the  state ;  that  the 
press  should  be  free  "  while  conforming  to  the  laws  which 
are  necessary  to  restrain  abuses  of  that  liberty  " — a  phrase 
suspiciously  elastic.  Those  who  had  purchased  the  con- 
fiscated property  of  the  crown,  the  church,  and  the  nobles, 
during  the  Revolution  were  assured  that  their  titles  were 
inviolable.  The  Napoleonic  nobility  was  placed  on  an  equal- 
ity with  the  old  nobility  of  France,  and  the  king  might 
create  new  peers  at  will,  but  nobility  was  henceforth  simply 


70        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

a  social  title  carrying  with  it  no  privileges  and  no  exemp- 
tions from  taxation  or  the  other  burdens  of  the  state/ 

Such  were  the  concessions  that  Louis  XVIII  was  willing 
to  make  to  the  spirit  of  the  times  and  the  demands  of  the 
people.  They  constituted  an  open  recognition  of  the  fact 
that  the  France  of  1815  was  not  to  be  a  restoration  of  the 
France  of  1789.  Certain  phrases  of  the  Charter  gave  offense, 
but  they  were  mainly  those  of  the  preamble  in  which  the  King 
labored  to  maintain  the  claim  of  the  divine  right  of  monarchy 
and  to  connect  his  act  with  medieval  precedents.  These 
phrases  were  far-fetched  and  curiously  archaic,  but  the  fact 
remained  that  with  all  its  limitations  the  Charter  granted 
France  a  larger  portion  of  self-government  than  it  had 
enjoyed  before,  except  during  a  brief  period  in  the  Revolu- 
tion. And  it  put  the  Bourbon  monarchy  on  record  as 
recognizing  the  principal  results  of  the  democratic  evolution 
of  society.  The  Restoration  started  out  by  accepting  the 
centralized  administrative  system,  the  great  law  codes,  the 
concordat,  and  the  nobility  of  Napoleon,  and  the  social  or- 
ganization created  by  the  Revolution. 

The  political  condition  of  France  after  1815  was  exceed- 
ingly troubled.      The  nation  was  divided  into  several  parties 
whose  animosity  toward  each  other  had  only  been  embittered 
louis  by  the  Hundred  Days.     Louis  XVIII,  restored  for  a  second 

XvTil,  ^jj^^g  j^    |.|^^  Adctorious  enemies  of  France,  was  eminently  quali- 

1755-1824.  -^     ^        ^  ^.  .  p,.  Ill 

fied  to  calm  the  seethmg  passions  of  his  countrymen  and  lead 

them  in  the  necessary  work  of  recuperation.  He  was  natu- 
rally a  man  of  moderate  opinions.  A  thorough  believer  in 
the  divine  right  of  monarchs  and  asserting  the  belief  with 
fervor,  he  was,  however,  too  clear-sighted  to  think  that  mon- 
archy of  the  type  historic  in  France  could  be  restored.  He 
saw  as  clearly  as  any  one  in  the  realm  the  greatness  of  the 
changes  that  had  latterly  been  effected  in  France,  and  that 

*The  Charter  may  be  found  in  full  in  Anderson,  Constitutions  and 
Documents,  No.  93,  or  in  Univ.  of  Penn.  Translations  and  Reprints, 
Vol.   1,  No.  3. 


LOUIS  XVIII  71 

his  very  throne  would  be  imperiled  if  he  attempted  to  undo 
any  of  the  important  work  of  the  Revolution.  He  willingly 
granted  a  constitution  to  his  people,  sharing  with  them  the 
power  which  his  ancestors  had  wielded  alone.  He  preferred 
to  rule  as  a  constitutional  king  than  not  to  rule  at  all. 
He  had  known  the  bitterness  of  the  exile's  life  too  well  to 
desire  to  be  compelled  to  "  resume  his  travels "  owing  to 
any  illiberal  conduct  on  his  part.  The  throne  was  for  him 
only  the  "  softest  of  chairs."  Cold-blooded,  skeptical,  free 
from  illusions,  free  from  the  passion  of  revenge,  indolent  by 
nature,  he  desired  to  avoid  conflicts  and  to  enjoy  his  power 
in  peace.  His  policy,  which  from  the  beginning  he  at- 
tempted to  carry  out,  was  expressed  by  himself  a  few  years 
later  in  these  words :  "  The  system  which  I  have  adopted 
.  .  is  based  on  the  maxim  that  it  will  never  do  to  be 
the  king  of  two  peoples,  and  to  the  ultimate  fusion  of  these — 
for  their  distinction  is  only  too  real — all  the  efforts  of  my 
government  are  directed." 

The  personality  of  the  King  seemed,  therefore,  admirably  The 

adapted  for  the  problem  that   confronted  France  in   1815.  difficulties 

.....  of  his 

But   there  were   difficulties   in    the   situation    that    foreboded  situation. 

trouble.  Louis  XVIII  had  been  restored  by  foreign  armies. 
His  presence  on  the  throne  Avas  a  constant  reminder  of  the 
humiliation  of  France.  Moreover,  his  strength  lay  not  in 
himself  but  in  the  historic  role  of  his  house,  in  immemorial 
prescription,  and  the  power  of  mere  custom  over  the  French 
mind  had  been  greatly  lessened  during  the  past  twenty- 
five  years.  But  a  more  serious  feature  was  his  environ- 
ment. The  court  was  now  composed  of  the  nobles  who  had 
suffered  greatly  from  the  Revolution,  who  had  been  robbed 
of  their  property,  driven  from  the  country,  Avho  had  seen 
many  of  their  relatives  executed  by  the  guillotine.  It  was  but 
natural  that  these  men  should  have  come  back  full  of  hatred 
for  the  authors  of  their  woes,  that  they  should  detest  the  ideas 
of  the  Revolution  and  the  persons  who  had  been  identified 
with  it.       These  men   were  not  free   from   passion,   as  was 


72         FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

Louis  XVIII.  More  eager  to  restore  the  former  glory  of 
the  crown,  the  former  rank  of  the  iiobihtj  and  the  clergy, 
more  bitter  toward  the  new  ideas  than  the  King  himself. 
The  Ultras,  they  were  the  Ultra-royalists,  or  Ultras — men  more  royalist 
than  the  King,  as  they  claimed.  They  saw  in  the  Revolution 
only  robbery  and  sacrilege  and  gross  injustice  to  them- 
selves. They  bitterly  assailed  Louis  XVIII  for  granting  the 
Charter,  a  dangerous  concession  to  the  Revolution,  and  they 
secretly  wished  to  abolish  it,  meanwhile  desiring  to  nullify 
its  liberal  provisions  as  far  as  possible.  They  constituted  tlie 
party  of  the  Right.  Their  leader  was  the  Count  of  Artois, 
brother  of  Louis  XVIII,  who,  the  King  being  childless,  stood 
next  in  line  of  succession.  These  men,  not  very  numerous, 
but  very  clamorous,  formed  the  natural  entourage  of  the 
monarch.  The  matter  of  most  pressing  importance  to 
France  Avas  what  power  of  resistance  the  King  w^ould  show 
to  this  resolute  and  revengeful  band.  Would  he  in  the  end 
give  way  to  them  or  would  he  be  able  to  control  them  ? 

The  other  parties  in  France  in  1815  were  shortly  differen- 
tiated. There  was  the  party  of  the  Left.  This  was  not  so 
much  a  coherent  group  as  a  conglomeration  of  the  disaffected. 
It  included  those  who  believed  in  a  republic,  who,  however, 
were  for  some  time  so  few  as  to  be  a  negligible  quantity.  It 
also  included  the  adherents  of  Napoleon.  This  class  was 
numerous  and  composed  chiefly  of  old  soldiers  who  saw  them- 
selves, the  glory  of  the  Napoleonic  state,  now  degraded,  put 
on  half-pay,  thrown  into  the  background.  These  radical 
and  discontented  elements  were  opposed  to  the  very  existence 
of  the  Bourbon  monarchy.  But  they  were  hopelessly  dis- 
credited by  the  abuses  and  the  failures  of  both  the  Republic 
and  the  Empire. 
The  Center  There  were  two  other  parties,  called  the  Right  Center 
parties.  and  the  Left  Center.     They  comprised  the  body  of  moderate 

men  who  stood  between  the  two  extremes  and  were  opposed 
to  both.  They  were  united  by  one  bond — common  loyalty 
to  the  Charter  which  the  King  had  granted.     They  were  the 


PARTIES  IN  FRANCE  73 

convinced  supporters  of  the  constitutional  regime,  but  they 
differed  from  each  other  in  their  interpretation  of  what  the 
Charter  should  mean.  The  Right  Center  accepted  it  as 
a  finality,  to  be  carried  out  honestly  and  to  the  letter.  The 
Left  Center  believed  in  its  honest  execution,  but  also  be- 
lieved that,  while  the  Charter  should  be  thus  observed,  men 
should  work  for  its  further  expansion,  that  as  the  years 
went  by  larger  constitutional  liberty  should  be  accorded 
to  the  people.  The  Charter  was  for  them  not  a  finality 
but  a  stepping-stone.  But  further  progress  should  be  at- 
tempted only  slowly  and  after  full  reflection.  Of  these  four 
parties,  two  were  distinctly  unconstitutional — the  Ultras  and 
the  Radicals  or  Left.  The  fonner,  professing  a  momentary 
lip  service  to  the  Charter,  were  resolved  to  alter  it  as  soon  as 
possible  in  fundamental  and  comprehensive  ways.  They  were 
in  principle  opposed  to  a  written  constitution.  They  wished 
to  restore  the  absolute  authority  of  the  king  and  the  former 
privileged  positions  of  clergy  and  nobility.  The  Charter 
stood  bluntly  in  the  way.  Consequently,  however  much  they 
might  dissemble,  they  favored  its  ultimate  abrogation.  The 
Radicals  favored  its  destruction  for  the  opposite  reason — 
that  the  Republic  or  the  Empire  might  be  restored,  the 
Revolution  made  triumphant  once  more.  The  two  middle 
parties  were  the  friends  of  the  new  regime. 

The  events  of  the  first  year  seemed  to  show  the  great  The  White 
power  of  the  Ultras.  Reaction  set  in  fast  and  furiously  in  ^"°'^- 
1815.  There  occurred  a  series  of  outrages  that  have  come 
down  in  history  as  the  White  Terror,  in  contradistinction 
to  the  Red  Terror  of  the  Revolution.  Immediately  after 
the  battle  of  Waterloo  rioting  broke  out  in  Marseilles,  led 
by  Royalists,  and  resulting  in  much  plundering  and  many 
murders.  The  movement  spread  to  other  departments  in  the 
south.  Religious  motives  were  added  to  the  political,  as  the 
Protestants,  particularly  numerous  in  the  south,  had  been 
strongly  attached  to  the  Revolution  and  to  Napoleon  and 
had  welcomed  the  return  of  the  latter  from  Elba.     The  white 


74        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

flag  of  the  Bourbons  was  disgraced  by  these  atrocities  com- 
mitted by  Royalists.  The  Government  was  in  no  sense  the 
cause  of  them,  but  it  was  criminally  negligent  in  not  trying 
to  repress  them. 

With  the  meeting  of  the  first  legislative  chambers  this 
campaign  of  revenge  and  reaction  became  systematic  and 
frenzied.  The  Chamber  of  Deputies  was  overwhelmingly 
Ultra-royalist,  elected,  as  it  had  been,  amid  the  terror 
and  demoralization  of  the  crashing  Empire.  It  demanded 
satisfaction  for  the  treachery  of  the  Hundred  Days.  As 
a  result  Marshal  Ney,  "  the  bravest  of  the  brave,"  and  other 
distinguished  French  soldiers,  were  condemned  to  death  and 
shot — an  everlasting  disgrace  to  the  Bourbon  monarchy. 
The  Chamber  demanded  repressive  measures  of  various  kinds 
from  the  King  and  got  them.  It  demanded  still  more  violent 
ones  which  the  King  would  not  concede.  The  dissension 
between  the  Moderate  Royalists,  represented  by  the  King, 
the  ministry,  and  the  Chamber  of  Peers,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  Ultras,  represented  by  the  Count  of  Artois  and  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies  on  the  other,  soon  reached  a  climax. 
The  King  himself  said  bitterly,  "  If  these  gentlemen  had 
full  liberty,  they  would  end  by  purging  even  me."  The 
representatives  of  the  foreign  governments  intervened  to 
say  that  so  unreasonable  a  reaction  must  cease,  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  stability  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy  and  of  the 
peace  of  Europe.  They  feared  that  the  revolutionary  ele- 
ments of  France  would  break  out  again,  stung  by  such  in- 
sane legislation.  The  Ultras  even  went  so  far  as  to  reject 
the  budget,  a  blazing  indiscretion,  as  it  offended  all  who 
were  financially  interested  in  France,  foreigners  and  French- 
Louis  men.     The  King  now   took   a  decisive  step,  prorogued  the 

XVIII  Chamber,  and  then  dissolved  it.      He  then  appealed  to  the 

checks    tlie 

Ultras  people   to   return   a   moderate   Chamber.       The   appeal   was 

wholly  successful  and  this  mad  reaction  was  speedily  brought 

to   a   close.       The  Ultra   majority  was   swept   away   and   a 

large  majority  of  Moderate  Royalists  was  returned.     France 


THE  WORK  OF  RECONSTRUCTION  75 

had  weathered  her  first  crisis  in  parliamentary  government, 
but  the  temper  of  the  Ultras  had  been  shown  with  the 
vividness  of  lightning.  France  had  had  emphatic  warn- 
ing of  the  danger  that  would  lie  in  the  triumph  of  that 
party. 

From  1816  to  1820  the  Government  of  France  was  able  A  period  of 

to  advance  along  more  liberal  lines.      The  two  chief  ministers,  "^°  ^^f.  ® 

^  .  liberalism. 

Richelieu  and  Decazes,  both  convinced  adherents  of  the  Bour- 
bon monarchy,  were  men  who  saw  the  utter  folly  of  attempts 
at  reaction  such  as  those  just  witnessed  and  who  believed 
that  the  pressing  needs  of  France  were  very  different  from 
those  of  a  faction  bent  on  revenge.  The  two  Centers  now 
controlled  Parliament,  and  for  several  years  worked  in  har- 
mony with  the  King. 

They  accomplished  much  for  the  rehabilitation  of  France. 
In  1815,  it  will  be  recalled,  the  Allies  had  imposed  a  large  war 
indemnity  on  France,  and  had  insisted  that  she  support  an 
army  of  occupation  of  150,000  in  eighteen  fortresses  of  the 
northern  and  eastern  departments  for  a  minimum  of  three, 
a  maximum  of  five,  years.  This  was  a  great  financial  burden 
and  a  greater  humiliation.      The  liberation  of  the  soil  of  the  The   libera- 

foreign  armies  was  a  task  which  the  King  and  the  ministry  ^ 

^  .  territory, 

had  very  much  at  heart.      To  effect  this  the  people  had  to 

make  great  sacrifices,  for  before  it  could  be  accomplished 
the  national  credit  must  be  re-established  and  to  effect  this 
Frenchmen  must  pay  higher  taxes.  This  they  did,  and 
France  proceeded  to  pay  off  the  immense  war  indemnity 
more  rapidly  that  the  powers  that  had  imposed  it  had  ex- 
pected would  be  possible.  By  1817  the  Allies  agreed  to 
withdraw  thirty  thousand  of  their  troops,  and  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  1818  they  agreed  to  withdraw 
the  remainder  before  the  close  of  that  year.  Thus  the  out- 
ward evidence  of  the  appalling  national  humiliation  was  re- 
moved. "  I  can  die  at  peace,"  said  Louis  XVIII,  "  since  I 
shall  see  France  free  and  the  French  flag  floating  over  every 
city  of  France."     France  was,  for  the  first  time  since  1815, 


76 


FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 


Reorgani- 
zation of 
the  army. 


mistress  in  her  own  house.  The  foreign  ambassadors  ceased 
their  weekly  meetings  in  Paris,  designed  for  the  drafting  of 
advice  to  be  given  to  the  French  Government.  The  foreign 
tutelage  was  over. 

The  reorganization  of  the  army  was  undertaken  at  this 
time.  The  military  power  of  France  had  been  sadly  shattered 
in  the  general  downfall  of  the  Napoleonic  system.  The  army 
was  reduced  to  a  few  corps  kept  up  by  voluntary  enlistment. 
Now  that  the  foreign  troops  were  to  be  withdrawn  and  France 
was  to  resume  her  full  place  in  international  affairs  it  was 
necessary  to  create  an  army  that  should  command  respect. 
There  were,  however,  difficulties  in  the  way.  A  large  army 
could  not  be  raised  by  volunteering.  And  yet  forced  military 
service  had  become,  under  Napoleon,  so  hateful  a  burden  that 
it  had  been  expressly  forbidden  in  the  Charter.  A  com- 
bination of  the  two  methods  lay  at  the  basis  of  the  new  law. 
Voluntary  enlistments  were  still  to  furnish  the  bulk  of  the 
army.  If  these  should  not  be  sufficient  recourse  should  be  had 
to  compulsion  to  complete  the  corps.  All  young  men  of 
twenty  years  of  age  should  draw  lots.  The  "  bad  numbers  " 
alone  would  be  forced  to  serve  for  six  years.  Forty  thousand 
might  thus  by  these  two  processes  be  enrolled  every  year. 
Having  served  in  the  active  army  six  years,  they  should  pass 
into  the  reserve  army  for  six  years  more.  This  reserve 
should  be  used  only  in  defense  of  the  soil  of  France,  should 
not  be  ordered  out  of  the  country.  It  was  estimated  that 
thus  there  would  be  an  army  of  240,000  men  on  a  peace 
footing.  Promotion  was  to  be  for  service  and  merit  and 
was  to  be  equally  open  to  all.  The  bill  was  violently  opposed 
by  the  Ultras  for  the  reason  that  it  destroyed  all  hope  of 
the  nobility  monopolizing  the  positions  in  the  army.  Their 
chances  were  simply  the  same  as  those  of  other  men.  The 
bill  became  law  in  1818.  Thus  the  basis  of  the  military  in- 
stitutions was  firmly  laid.  The  army  as  thus  constituted 
lasted  with  some  alterations  of  detail  down  to  1868,  surviving 
many  violent  changes  in  French  liistory. 


THE  ELECTORAL  SYSTEM  77 

On  two  other  subjects  this  moderate  ministry  of  Riche-  The 
lieu  carried  important  legislation,  the  electoral  system  and  the  g  ^gj„ 
liberty  of  the  press.  Concerning  both  matters  the  Charter 
had  merely  laid  down  general  principles,  leaving  the  manner 
in  which  they  should  be  applied  to  be  determined  by  the 
legislature  in  special  laws.  A  liberty  so  large  enabled  the 
legislature  to  determine  the  real  character,  the  range,  and 
effect  of  two  fundamental  privileges,  and  as  the  different 
parties  soon  saw  that  by  framing  the  laws  in  this  way,  or 
in  that,  they  could  further  their  own  interests,  both  matters 
became  the  subject  of  passionate  contention  in  parliament 
all  through  the  period  of  the  Restoration,  and  laws  very 
dissimilar  in  character  and  in  effect  were  passed  as  first 
one  party,  then  another,  gained  ascendency  in  the  state. 
Moderates  and  Ultras  differed  on  these  questions  as  on 
others. 

Concerning  the  electoral  system,  the  ideas  of  the  Mod- 
erates were  shown  in  the  law  of  1817,  passed  by  the  Richelieu- 
Decazes  ministry.  The  Charter  merely  stated  the  qualifica- 
tions required  of  voters  and  of  deputies.  The  manner  in 
which  the  voters  should  elect  the  deputies  was  not  defined. 
The  law  of  1817  established  the  system  of  the  so-called  gen- 
eral ticket  {scrutin  de  liste)  ;  that  is,  the  voters  of  each  de- 
partment should  meet  in  the  chief  town  of  the  department, 
and  there  elect  all  the  deputies  to  which  the  department  was 
entitled.  This  system  favored  the  Moderates  and  Liberals, 
who  belonged  generally  to  the  bourgeoisie,  to  the  industrial 
and  trading  classes,  largely  an  urban  population,  whereas 
the  country  gentlemen,  the  landed  proprietors  and  their 
tenants,  living  in  the  country,  were  chiefly  Ultras,  members 
or  adherents  of  the  aristocracy  of  the  old  regime.  Many 
of  these  found  it  difficult  or  expensive  or  annoying  to  make 
the  trip  to  the  chief  town  of  the  department,  where  alone 
they  could  cast  their  votes.  Thus  the  law,  which  remained 
in  force  from  1817  to  1820,  favored  the  Moderates  as  each 
succeeding  election  showed. 


78        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

The  press  There  was  passed  in  1819  a  press  law,  much  more  liberal 

'  than  that  of  the  Napoleonic  period,  which  had,  in  the  main, 
been  carried  over  into  the  first  years  of  the  Restoration. 
The  censorship  was  abolished,  and  press  cases  were  hence- 
forth to  be  tried  before  juries.  But  even  under  this  system 
newspapers  were  a  luxury,  enjoyed  only  by  the  rich  and  well- 
to-do,  as  they  were  not  sold  by  the  single  copy  but  only  to 
subscribers  at  a  high  price,  and  in  addition  there  was  a  stamp 
tax  on  each  copy  of  two  cents,  and  a  postage  duty  of  one 
cent.  Moreover,  while  freedom  in  establishing  newspapers 
was  guaranteed,  as  a  matter  of  fact  only  the  well-to-do  could 
establish  them,  owing  to  the  large  preliminary  deposit  re- 
quired of  their  proprietors,  which  was  to  serve  as  a  guaranty 
fund  for  the  payment  of  fines  that  might  be  inflicted  as  a 
result  of  damage  suits. 

Activity  of  But  this  body  of  liberal  legislation  rested  upon  an  insecure 
^  ^^^'  basis,  the  favor  of  the  King,  and  the  coherence  of  the  great 
mass  of  moderate  men,  the  Centers.  The  Ultras  did  not  re- 
linquish their  activity  and  were  alert  to  seize  upon  every 
incident  that  might  discredit  the  party  in  power.  Nor  had 
they  long  to  wait.  Events  shortly  occurred  that  aroused 
misgivings  among  the  most  timid  of  the  Moderates,  tending 
to  drive  them  over  to  the  Ultras,  events,  too,  that  shook  the 
firmness  of  the  King.  According  to  the  Charter  there  was 
to  be  a  partial  renewal  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  each  year, 
one-fifth  of  that  body  passing  out,  and  their  places  being 
filled  by  new  elections.  These  elections  showed  a  distinct 
trend  in  favor  of  the  Radical  party,  or  party  of  the  Left. 
At  the  first  renewal  in  1817,  twenty-five  "  independents  "  of 
the  Left  were  returned;  in  1818  the  result  was  similar,  the 
Left  increasing  to  forty-five.  Among  them  were  Lafayette 
and  Manuel,  both  prominent  figures  in  the  Revolution. 
Now  the  principles  of  the  Left  were  not  only  liberal,  but  were 
largely  anti-dynastic.  While  that  wing  acquiesced  in  the 
existence  of  the  Bourbon  monarchy,  it  might  at  any  time 
become  actively  opposed  to  it. 


THE  ELECTION  OF  ABBE  GREGOIKE         79 

The  elections  in  1819  added  greatly  to  the  growing  Left —  Election  of 
•  •  -  rt  (rrccToirc 

it  numbering  now  ninety  out  of  a  total  of  258.     But  more 

damaging  than  the  number  was  the  character  of  some  of 
the  members  chosen,  particularly  of  Gregoire.  Gregoire 
had  played  a  prominent  role  in  the  Revolution,  having  been 
a  member  of  the  Constituent  Assembly  and  of  the  Conven- 
tion. He  had  aided  in  the  overthrow  of  the  Roman  Cathohc 
Church.  He  had  shown  himself  a  fervid  republican.  A 
remark  of  his  that  kings  are  in  the  moral  world  what 
monsters  are  in  the  physical  had  had  an  immense  notoriety, 
and  was  not  yet  forgotten.  He  was  not  a  regicide,  as  he  was 
absent  from  Paris  at  the  time  of  the  trial  of  Louis  XVI, 
but  he  was,  owing  to  his  utterances,  commonly  considered 
one.  No  man  was  more  odious  to  the  Ultras  and  his  election 
to  the  Chamber  outraged  their  deepest  feelings.  Some  of 
them  had  themselves  helped  bring  about  his  election,  believ- 
ing that  the  triumph  of  so  notable  a  revolutionary  would 
help  them  in  upsetting  the  mild  policy  of  the  ministry 
and  bring  about  the  longed-for  reaction.  In  this  they  were 
largely  right,  as  this  election  aroused  consternation  in  the 
ranks  of  those  who  had  hitherto  been  moderate,  and  drove 
many  into  the  camp  of  the  Ultras.  The  chief  minister, 
Decazes,  (Richelieu  having  previously  resigned),  was  con- 
vinced that  some  change  must  be  made  in  the  policy  of  the 
Government.  The  Ultras  raged  against  this  "  regicidal 
priest,"  declared  that  either  he  must  yield  to  the  dynasty 
or  the  dynasty  to  him,  and  in  a  stormy  session  and  amid 
shouts  of  "  Long  live  the  King,"  voted  his  exclusion  from 
the  Chamber,  to  which  he  had  been  chosen.  The  freedom 
of  elections  was  thus  grossly  violated,  as  well  as  the  promise 
of  the  Charter  that  the  past  should  be  forgotten. 

But  an  event  far  more  damaging  to  the  Moderates  now  Murder  of 
occurred — the  murder   of  the   Duke  of  Berry.      The   Duke  *^®  'Ov.'ke  of 
was  the  younger  son  of  the  Count  of  Artois,   and  as   his 
elder  brother, the  Duke  of  Angouleme,  had  no  heir,  he  was  the 
hope  of  the  dynasty.     At  about  eleven  o'clock  on  the  even- 


80        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

ing  of  February  13,  1820,  as  he  was  helping  his  wife  into 
a  carriage  at  the  door  of  the  Opera,  he  was  violently 
attacked  by  a  man,  named  Louvel,  who  plunged  a  dagger 
into  his  breast.  The  Duke  died  in  the  opera  house  at  five 
o'clock,  surrounded  by  the  royal  family,  and  demanding 
pardon  for  the  murderer.  The  murderer  desired  to  cut  off 
the  Bourbon  line,  which  he  thought  he  could  do  as  the  Duke 
had  no  children.  His  act  was  his  own ;  he  had  no  accomplices. 
But  the  Royalists  at  once  asserted  that  the  Liberal  party  was 
responsible  and  that  anarchy  was  the  natural  result  of  the 
policy  of  liberalism.  Their  opposition  was  directed  against 
the  ministry  under  Decazes,  whom  they  succeeded  in  forcing 
to  resign.  At  his  resignation  Louis  XVIII  is  said  to  have 
remarked,  "  It  is  over  with  me,"  meaning  that  from  that 
time  on  his  policy  of  reconciliation  was  over,  that  the  party 
headed  by  the  Count  of  Artois  would  control.  This  was 
virtually  to  be  the  case.  In  1820  began  the  great  royalist 
reaction,  started  in  1815,  suspended  from  1816  to  1820, 
when  the  more  moderate  policies  prevailed,  and  destined  now 
to  last  with  but  a  single  shght  interruption  until  1830,  when 
it  culminated  in  a  new  revolution. 
Electoral  'pj^g  Right,  now  in  control,  proceeded  to  undo  much  of  the 

1820  work  of  the  preceding  ministries.     By  the  electoral  law  of 

1820  that  of  1817  was  rescinded,  and  a  new  system  brought 
into  existence.  The  Chamber  of  Deputies  was  enlarged 
from  258  members  to  430,  an  increase  of  172.  The  electors 
of  deputies  were  no  longer  to  meet  together  in  the  chief 
town  of  the  department  and  vote  for  all  the  deputies  from 
that  department,  but  were  to  be  divided  into  as  many  groups 
or  colleges  as  there  were  arrondissements  or  districts  in  the 
department.  Each  voter  was  therefore  to  vote  for  one  deputy 
only,  the  one  from  his  district.  Thus  the  principle  of  single- 
member  constituencies  was  adopted.  This  arrangement 
would  be  advantageous  to  the  Ultras,  as  the  country  gentle- 
men and  their  tenants,  supporters  of  that  party, 
no    longer    having    to    make    the    journey    to    the    cliief 


THE  LAW  OF  THE  DOUBLE  VOTE  81 

town,  but  enabled  to  vote  at  places  nearer  home,  would  come 
to  the  polls  in  larger  numbers.  In  this  way  258  members 
were  to  be  chosen.  The  other  172  were  to  be  elected  in  a 
special  manner.  At  the  chief  town  of  each  department  were 
to  meet  one-fourth  of  the  voters,  those  who  paid  the  heaviest 
taxes,  and  they  were  to  choose  the  additional  172.  This 
method,  of  course,  greatly  augmented  the  power  of  the  rich. 
It  thus  happened  that  about  twelve  thousand  voters  had  the 
right  to  vote  twice,  once  in  the  district  and  once  in  the  de- 
partment college,  and  similarly  were  twice  represented — by 
the  deputies  chosen  in  both  ways,  in  both  of  which  elections 
they  participated.  Hence  this  electoral  law  of  1820  Avas  called 
tlie  law  of  the  double  vote.  Moreover,  the  president  of  each  The  double 
electoral  college  was  to  be  chosen  by  the  central  government 
and  the  voters  must  write  out  their  ballots  in  his  presence 
and  hand  them  to  him  unfolded — an  excellent  device  for 
enabling  the  Government  to  bring  pressure  upon  them  in 
favor  of  its  candidates.  This  bill  was  hotly  contested  in 
the  Chamber  and  outside.  The  debate  was  long  and  im- 
passioned, participated  in  by  over  a  hundred  and  twenty 
members.  The  principle  of  the  law,  the  double  vote,  was 
adopted  only  by  a  majority  of  five.  Hailed  with  enthusiasm 
by  the  Ultras  it  assured  their  ascendency.  By  1824  the 
independents,  or  Radicals,  numbered  only  seven. 

The  liberal  press  law  of  1819  went  the  same  way  after  a  The    censor- 
brief  existence  of  ten  months.     It  was  rescinded.     The  cen-  \  ^^  , 

stored. 

sorship  was  restored.  No  journal  could  be  founded  without 
the  Government's  consent,  no  single  issue  could  appear  with- 
out the  censor's  permission,  the  Government  might  suspend 
its  publication  for  six  months,  and  even  under  certain  con- 
ditions suppress  it  (1820).  This  control,  which  would  ap- 
pear sufficient,  was  strengthened  tAvo  years  later  by  an 
additional  law  which  enabled  the  Government  to  suppress 
publications  even  for  "  tendencies  "  when  no  definite  infrac- 
tion of  the  law  could  be  proved. 

Armed  with  these  powerful  instruments   for  the   control 


82 


FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 


French 

invasion 

Spain. 


of 


Triumph   of 
the   Ultras. 


Death  of 
Louis 

xvm. 


of  elections  and  of  the  organs  of  opinion  and  agitation,  the 
Ultras  pushed  confidently  forward,  and  their  future  appeared 
assured  by  the  birth  of  a  posthumous  son  of  the  Duke  of 
Berry.  Thc}^  forced  the  King  to  send  an  army  into  Spain 
to  restore  Ferdinand  VII  to  an  absolute  throne  in  the  interests 
of  the  Holy  Alliance  (1823).  They  thus  hoped  to  throw 
military  glamor  over  the  restored  House  of  Bourbon,  to 
efface  by  dazzling  exploits  the  uncomfortable  memory  of 
those  performed  by  Napoleon.  Flushed  with  an  easy  victory 
in  Spain,  the  Ultras  resumed  the  policy  of  political  and  re- 
ligious reaction  at  home  with  great  enthusiasm. 

Thinking  that  a  new  election  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies 
held  during  the  war  fever  would  result  overwhemingly  in  its 
favor,  the  Villele  ministry  (1822-1828)  caused  the  existing 
Chamber  to  be  dissolved  and  new  elections  to  be  ordered. 
They  were  held  in  February  1824,  and  resulted  as  desired 
in  a  sweeping  triumph  of  the  Ultras.  Of  the  430  deputies 
elected  only  fifteen  were  Liberals.  This  triumph  had  been 
achieved  only  by  the  grossest  abuse  of  power  on  the  part  of 
the  Government,  which  stopped  at  nothing  to  gain  its  ends. 
It  even  went  so  far  as  to  relieve  many  prominent  Liberals  of 
taxes,  so  that  they  could  not  meet  the  tax  qualification  for 
voters  or  for  membership  in  the  Chamber. 

A  law  was  now  passed  decreeing  that  the  new  Chamber 
should  last  seven  years,  to  be  entirely  reconstructed  at  the 
end  of  that  time.  This  was  an  arbitrary  change  in  the 
Charter. 

The  reactionary  party,  now  overwhelmingly  in  the  major- 
ity in  the  Chamber,  and  declaring  that  that  Chamber  should 
not  be  altered  for  seven  years,  thus  lengthening  the  term 
and  suppressing  the  annual  partial  renewal,  considered  that 
it  could  safely  advance  to  the  realization  of  its  most  cherished 
plans,  too  long  held  in  abeyance.  Their  project  was  helped 
by  the  death  in  1824  of  Louis  XVIII,  and  the  accession  to 
power  of  his  brother,  the  Count  of  Artois,  who  assumed  the 
title  of  Charles  X.      Charles  had  virtually  directed  the  policy 


CHARACTER  OF  CHARLES  X  83 

of  his  brother  for  several  years.  His  accession,  however, 
would  necessarily  give  it  additional  impetus.  He  needed 
only  six  years  thoroughly  to  uproot  the  elder  branch  of  the 
House  of  Bourbon. 

THE  REIGN  OF  CHARLES  X 

The  characteristics  of  the  new  King  were  well  known.  He  Charles  X, 
was  the  convinced  leader  of  the  reactionaries  in  France  from 
1814  to  1830.  He  had  been  the  constant  and  bitter  oppo- 
nent of  his  brother's  liberalism,  and  had  finally  seen  that 
liberalism  forced  to  yield  to  the  growing  strength  of  the 
party  which  he  led.  He  was  not  likely  to  abandon  lifelong 
principles  at  the  age  of  sixty-seven,  and  at  the  moment 
when  he  seemed  about  to  be  able  to  put  them  into  force. 
Louis  XVIII  had  made  an  honest  effort  to  reconcile  the  two 
social  regimes  and  systems  into  which  Frenchmen  were  di- 
vided— the  old  pre-revolutionary  regime  and  the  new  regime, 
the  product  of  the  Revolution,  the  old  nobility  and  the 
modern  middle  class  with  its  principle  of  equality  before 
the  law.  The  nobility  had  returned  from  abroad  unchanged, 
with  ideas  of  feudal  privileges,  with  the  determination  to 
restore  as  much  as  possible  of  the  old  power  of  the  landed 
aristocracy  and  of  the  church,  faithful  support  of  the 
monarchy  by  divine  right.  The  policy  of  reconciliation  had 
been  badly  shattered  during  the  closing  years  of  Louis 
XVIII's  reign.  With  the  accession  of  Charles  X  it  was  Policy  of 
entirely  abandoned,  and  that  of  restoration  vigorously  at-  *^®  ^^"^ 
tempted.  Not  that  this  was  proclaimed  from  the  housetops. 
Charles  rather  at  first  attempted  to  reassure  the  somewhat 
perturbed  mind  of  the  nation.  He  announced  his  firm  in- 
tention to  support  the  Charter,  and  declared  that  all 
Frenchmen  were,  in  his  eyes,  equal.  He  liberated  political 
prisoners  and  won  great  applause  by  abolishing  the  censor- 
ship of  the  press.  But  these  halcyon  days  were  limited  to 
the  inauguration  of  the  new  Government.  At  the  corona- 
tion  of  the   King,   France  was   treated   to   a   spectacle   of 


84        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

medieval  mummery  that  impressed  most  unpleasantly  a 
people  that  had  for  a  generation  been  living  in  the  posi- 
tive realities  of  the  modern  spirit.  It  seemed  the  most 
incredible  height  of  absurdity  to  see  the  King  anointed  on 
seven  parts  of  his  person  with  sacred  oil,  miraculously  pre- 
served, it  was  asserted,  and  dating  from  the  time  of  Clovis. 
Nor  could  France,  in  the  modern  scientific  atmosphere, 
gravely  believe,  as  it  was  asked  to,  in  the  power  of  the  king's 
touch.  Beranger's  witty  poem  on  Charles  the  Simple  was 
on  everybody's  lips. 
The  nobles        Rut  the  legislation  now  brought  forward  by  the  King,  and 

^    largely  enacted,  showed  the  belated  political  and  social  ideas 
for  property        =>    ./  ?  x- 

confiscated  of  this  Government.  It  was  first  proposed  to  grant  nine 
during  the  hundred  and  eighty-eight  million  francs  to  the  nobility  whose 
evo  u  ion.  jg^j-,jg  ]^^^  j^ggj^  confiscated  during  the  Revolution  and  sold 
as  "  national  property  "  to  private  individuals.  The  Charter 
explicitly  assured  the  purchasers  of  this  land  that  they 
should  not  be  molested  in  their  possession.  But  the  courtiers, 
despite  this  assurance,  were  demanding  the  restoration  of 
their  estates  to  themselves.  The  King  expressed  the  belief 
that  by  this  act  the  last  wounds  of  the  Revolution  would  be 
closed.  The  emigres  should  not  receive  their  lands,  but  they 
should  receive  a  money  indemnification. 

The  debates  on  this  proposal  were  heated.  Many  of  the 
Ultra-royalists  criticised  it,  saying  that  the  sum  proposed 
was  entirely  insufficient.  Many  rejected  the  very  idea  of 
indemnification,  but  demanded  that  the  "  stolen  goods " 
themselves  be  given  back.  That  there  was  an  article  in  the 
Charter  preventing  this  they  did  not  consider  a  legitimate 
obstacle. 

The  Opposition,  however,  did  not  lack  arguments.  Had  the 
descendants  of  those  whose  property  had  been  seized  after  the 
revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  ever  been  indemnified.'' 
Had  the  emigres  suffered  so  much  more  than  others  from 
the  Revolution  that  they  alone  should  be  compensated  for 
their  losses.''     It  might  be  right  to  compensate  those  who  had 


J 


COMPENSATION  OF  THE  EMIGRES  85 

nad  to  flee  from  France  to  save  their  lives,  but  many  of 
these  emigres  who  were  now  to  help  themselves  out  of  the 
public  treasury  had  fled  voluntarily  in  order  to  bring  about 
an  invasion  of  France  by  foreigners,  and,  when  that  invasion 
had  occurred,  had  themselves  joined  it  and  borne  arms  against 
France.  Confiscation  of  property  was  a  very  proper  pun- 
ishment for  such  persons.  Again,  those  who  had  remained 
at  home  and  defended  the  fatherland  had  suffered  as  much 
as  those  who  had  emigrated  and  then  invaded  it.  Further- 
more, this  measure  would  aid  only  the  landed  proprietors, 
but  many  fortunes,  based  upon  personal  property,  had  like- 
wise been  destroyed  by  the  Revolution. 

The  bill  passed  (1825)  and  became  law,  though  the  Op- 
position in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  was  larger  than  had 
been  expected.  Charles  called  it  "  an  act  of  justice."  It 
was  perhaps  wise  in  the  sense  that  all  purchasers  of  national 
domains,  who,  despite  the  assurance  of  the  Charter,  were 
constantly  threatened,  were  henceforth  safe.  The  value  of 
these  properties  immediately  rose  in  the  market.  But  while 
the  act  pleased  the  emigres  and  satisfied  the  purchasers  of 
their  domains,  it  offended  the  great  mass  of  Frenchmen. 

The  manner  in  which  the  transaction  was  to  be  carried  into  Method  of 

effect  was  as  follows :  the  sum  involved  was  estimated  at  about  P^^^^^ 

indemnity, 
a  billion  francs ;  the  financial  condition  of  the  state  did  not 

permit  the  outright  payment  of  so  immense  a  capital;  it  was 

decided,  therefore,  to  pay  not  the  capital  but  the  interest 

each  year.    This,  it  was  estimated,  would  increase  the  annual 

expenditures  of  the  state  by  about  thirty  millions,^    This  sum 

was  procured  by  the  conversion  of  the  existing  debt  of  France 

from  a  five  per  cent,  to  a  three  per  cent,  basis,  thus  saving 

about  28,000,000  francs  in  interest  charges.     In  this  way 

the  indemnification  of  the  emigres  would  be  effected  without 

an  increase  in  taxes.     But  this  new  act  offended  the  nation's 

bondholders,  who   saw  their  income   arbitrarily   reduced  by 

*  As  a  matter  of  fact,  interest  was  paid  not  on  a  billion  but  on  about 
625,000,000   francs. 


86        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 


The  law 

against 

sacrilege. 


Clerical 
reaction. 


two-fifths.  Thus  the  monarchy  made  enemies  of  a  powerful 
class  of  capitalists,  particularly  the  bankers  of  Paris. 
Money  was  taken  from  Peter  to  pay  Paul.  The  strength 
of  this  class,  which  felt  itself  outrageously  defrauded,  was 
to  be  shown  in  1830  to  the  great  discomfiture  of  the  Bourbon 
monarchy. 

Another  law  that  cast  discredit  upon  this  reign,  and  helped 
undermine  it  with  the  great  mass  of  Frenchmen,  was  the 
law  against  sacrilege.  By  this  act  burglaries  committed  in 
ecclesiastical  buildings  and  the  profanation  of  holy  vessels 
were,  under  certain  conditions,  made  punishable  with  death. 
This  barbaric  law  was,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  never  enforced, 
but  it  bore  striking  witness  to  the  temper  of  the  party  in 
power,  and  has  ever  since  been  a  mark  of  shame  upon  the 
Bourbon  monarchy.  It  helped  to  weaken  the  hold  of  the 
Bourbons  upon  France.  It  created  a  feeling  of  intense 
bitterness  among  the  middle  and  lower  classes  of  society, 
which  were  still  largely  dominated  by  the  rationalism  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  They  began  to  fear  the  clerical  re- 
action more  even  than  the  political  and  social.  The  re- 
newed missionary  zeal  of  the  church,  the  denunciation  by 
Catholic  bishops  of  civil  marriage  as  concubinage,  the  open 
and  great  activity  of  the  Jesuits,  a  society  that  had  been 
declared  illegal  in  France,  all  indicated  the  growing  influence 
of  the  clergy  in  the  state,  an  impression  not  decreased  when, 
in  1826,  the  Papal  Jubilee  was  celebrated  with  great  elab- 
orateness, and  Frenchmen  saw  the  King  himself,  clad  in  the 
violet  robe  of  a  prelate  and  accompanied  by  the  court, 
walking  in  a  religious  procession  through  the  streets 
of  Paris.  The  university  was  under  the  control  of  the 
local  bishop,  who  kept  watch  over  professors  whose  opinions 
were  denounced  as  dangerous,  and  who  suspended  many  of 
their  courses,  as,  for  instance,  those  of  Cousin  and  Guizot. 
Was  it  the  purpose  of  the  dominant  party  to  restore  both 
the  nobility  and  the  church  to  the  proud  position  they  had 
occupied  before  the  Revolution? 


PROPOSED  LAW  OF  INHERITANCE  87 

Criticism   of  the  evident  policy   of   the   Government   was  Attempt  to 
becoming  general  and  ominous.     But  the  ministry  proceeded 
with  its  plans  with  unusual  fatuousness.     It   now  attacked  ^ipie  of 
what  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  precious  acquisitions  primo- 
of  the  Revolution,  the  right  to  an  equal  division  of  an  in-  &eniture. 
heritance  among  all  the  heirs.     The  ministry  brought   for- 
ward a  proposal,  quite  modest  in  its  scope,  to  re-establish 
the   principle  of  primogeniture.     The   Civil   Code    provided 
that   in   case   the  deceased   died   without   leaving   a    will,   his 
real  estate  should  be  apportioned  equally  among  his  heirs ; 
and  this  equal  division  was  to  be  made  of  most  of  his  property 
in  land,  even  if  he  did  leave  a  will.     He  was  given  liberty 
freely  to  dispose  by  will  of  only  a  portion  larger  or  smaller, 
according  to  the  number  of  children. 

The  proposal  now  made  was  that  this  disposable  part,  which 
a  man  might  will  to  his  eldest  son  if  he  chose,  should  go  to 
him  likewise,  if  there  were  no  will,  as  a  legal  advantage  over 
the  other  children.  This  was  to  be  the  law  only  for  those 
who  paid  three  hundred  francs  in  direct  taxes.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  this  law  would  affect  probably  not  more  than  eighty 
thousand  families  out  of  six  million.  Furthermore,  the 
father  was  in  no  way  forced  to  constitute  this  preference 
for  his  eldest  son,  since  he  was  left  full  liberty  of  testa- 
mentary disposition.  Yet  the  mere  suggestion  threw  the 
country  into  commotion.  The  prevailing  thought  was  ex- 
pressed by  the  Duke  of  Broglie,  who  said :  "  This  is  no 
law.  It  is  a  manifesto  against  existing  society.  It  is  a 
forerunner  of  twenty  other  laws  which,  if  your  wisdom  does 
not  prevent  it,  will  break  in  upon  us  and  will  leave  no 
rest  to  the  society  of  France,  which  has  been  the  growth 
of  the  last  forty  years."  The  proposition  was  defeated  in 
the  Chamber  of  Peers.  For  several  nights  the  streets  of 
Paris  were  illuminated  in  gratitude  for  this  escape  from 
feudalism. 

These  measures  and  failures,  which  were  costing  the  min- 
istry much  popularity,  were  crowned  by  an  attempt  to  render 


88        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

Attempt  to    tlie  press  law  more  stringent.     Charles  X  had  long  since  re- 

es  roy       e  „j.g|-|.gjj   |^jg    ^^^   jj^   abolishing   the    censorship.     A   bill   was 
freedom    of    '^  .  . 

the  press.      "O"'    proposed  which   wound   an   amazing   mesh   around   the 

printing  presses  of  France.  So  sweeping  was  it  in  char- 
acter, giving  the  Government  a  practically  unlimited  con- 
trol of  all  publications,  both  periodical,  like  the  daily  papers, 
and  non-periodical,  that  it  aroused  immediately  a  remark- 
able opposition.  It  was  denounced  as  barbaric  by  Chateau- 
briand, the  foremost  man  of  letters  in  France.  "  Printing," 
said  Casimir-Perier,  "  is  suppressed  in  France  to  the  ad- 
vantage of  Belgium."  Those  engaged  in  this  business,  as 
well  as  the  prominent  writers  and  members  of  the  French 
Academy,  protested  with  vigor.  The  bill  passed  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies,  but  In  the  Chamber  of  Peers  an  oppo- 
sition so  intense  developed  that  the  ministry  deemed  it  wise 
to  withdraw  the  measure  before  it  came  to  a  vote.  Paris 
was  illuminated  in  honor  of  this  escape.  The  provinces 
imitated  the  capital.  These  outbursts  of  joy  were  occa- 
sioned not  only  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  press  law.  The 
people  were  already  celebrating  the  fall  of  the  hated  Villele 
ministry,  which  was  felt  to  be  imminent. 

Disband-  The  mistakes  of  this  ministry,  however,  were  not  yet  over. 

ment  of  the  ^  ^^^    .^  ^^^^^  ^^^  withdrawal  of  this  press  bill  the  Na- 

National  ,  -^  .  ,         ^.       ^        ,         ,. 

Guard.  tional   Guard  was   reviewed   by    the   Kmg.      The   Kmg  was 

personally  received  with  much  warmth,  but  cries  of  "  Long 
live  the  Charter,"  "  Down  with  the  Ministers,  down  with  the 
Jesuits,"  were  heard  from  the  troops.  Villele  at  once  de- 
manded that  these  troops  be  disbanded.  The  King  consented 
and  it  was  done.  This  was  a  mistake  for  two  reasons:  be- 
cause it  offended  the  bourgeoisie  of  Paris,  thus  far  opposed 
to  the  ministry  but  loyal  to  the  King,  and  because  the  men 
were  permitted  to  retain  their  arms,  of  which  three  years 
later  they  were  to  make  effective  use. 

The  ministry,  conscious  of  rapidly  waning  power,  did  not 
propose  to  yield,  but  attempted  to  crush  the  opposition. 
It  had  been  unable  to  get  the  press  bill  through  Parliament. 


THE  MARTIGNAC  MINISTRY  89 

The  chief  resistance  the  ministry  had  encountered  had  come  Attempt   to 

from  the  Chamber  of  Peers,  which  had  favored  a  moderate  ^  ^™^  °" 

the  opposi- 
pohcy.     Villele  thought  to   overcome  this  by  packing  that  ^^^^^  ^j^  p^^. 

chamber  with  men  who  would  support  the  ministry  through  liament. 
thick  and  thin.  Consequently  seventy-six  new  peers  were 
created,  enough,  it  was  thought,  to  enable  the  ministry  to 
control  that  body  thenceforth.  But  it  was  also  clear  that 
the  opposition  was  growing  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  too. 
Although  the  ministry  was  able  to  get  its  measures  through 
that  chamber,  its  majority  was  gradually  becoming  smaller. 
Villele  therefore  decided  to  dissolve  the  Chamber,  although 
it  had  yet  four  years  to  run.  He  expected  by  manipulation 
of  the  election  to  get  an  assembly  in  its  place  overwhelmingly 
in  favor  of  the  ministry.  Thus,  with  the  press  shackled, 
and  the  Chamber  of  Peers  and  Chamber  of  Deputies  con- 
trolled, the  ministry  could  retrieve  the  rebuffs  it  had  recently 
experienced  and  carry  out  its  policy  in  all  its  vigor. 

Never  did  a  minister  make  a  greater  mistake.  The  min- 
istry was  overwhelmingly  defeated  in  the  elections.  Its  sup- 
porters numbered  only  170;  the  combined  opposing  elements 
counted  250.     Villele  retired  from  office. 

The  Martignac  ministry  now  came  in  in  January  1828.  The 

The  difficulties  in  its  way  were  numerous.     It  had  neither     ^^.^f 

•'  ministry. 

the  favor  of  the  King,  nor  the  hearty  support  of  the 
Chambers.  Charles  X  told  the  new  ministers,  "  Villele's  pol- 
icy was  mine,  and  I  hope  you  will  endeavor  to  carry  it  out 
as  best  you  can."  Martignac,  however,  made  no  such  at- 
tempt, but  strove  rather  to  carry  out  a  liberal  policy,  some- 
what like  that  of  the  years  1816-20.  The  professors, 
Guizot,  Villemain,  whose  courses  Villele  had  stopped,  were 
reinstated.  A  somewhat  more  liberal  press  law  was  carried, 
abolishing  censorship  and  the  offense  of  "  tendency."  An 
educational  law  was  enacted  directed  against  the  Jesuits  and 
intended  to  please  the  more  liberal  religious  element.  But 
Martignac's  course  suited  neither  the  Right  nor  the  Left, 
and  he  shortly  resigned.     This  pleased  Charles  X,  who  re- 


Polignac 
ministry 


90        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

sented  the  liberalism  of  the  ministry.  Charles  believed  that 
he  had  the  right  to  choose  the  ministers  to  suit  himself, 
whether  they  pleased  the  Chamber  or  not.  "  I  would  rather 
saw  wood,"  he  said,  "  than  be  a  king  of  the  English  type." 
The  With  the  fall  of  the  Martignac  ministry  in  1829  fell  also 

the  last  attempt  made  under  the  rule  of  the  Bourbon  Legiti- 
mists to  fuse  old  and  new  France,  to  reconcile  monarchy  £Uid 
constitutional  freedom.  The  announcement  of  the  new  min- 
isters was  received  with  great  popular  indignation.  The 
chief  minister  was  Polignac,  son  of  the  Countess  of  Poli- 
gnac,  the  friend  of  Marie  Antoinette.  Polignac  had  been 
one  of  the  leaders  of  the  emigres  at  the  outbreak  of  the 
Revolution,  had  joined  in  the  Cadoudal  conspiracy  against 
Napoleon,  had  been  sentenced  to  death,  but  had  escaped  with 
simply  imprisonment,  owing  to  the  intervention  of  Josephine. 
In  1815  he  had  protested  against  the  Charter,  and  had  long 
refused  to  take  the  oath  to  support  it.  He  had  for  years 
been  very  closely  identified  with  Charles  X,  and  had  favored 
the  most  extreme  laws  proposed  by  him.  Other  ministers 
were  Bourmont  in  the  War  Office,  a  nian  who  was  commonly 
supposed  to  have  been  a  traitor  to  Napoleon,  consequently 
to  France,  in  1815,  and  Labourdonnaye,  Minister  of  the 
Interior,  connected  in  the  popular  mind  with  the  White  Terror 
of  1815.  Even  Metternich,  who  could  ordinarily  view  a 
policy  of  reaction  with  fortitude,  considered  the  advent 
of  such  a  ministry  a  matter  of  considerable  gravity.  "  The 
change  in  the  ministry  is  of  the  first  importance,"  he  wrote. 
"  All  the  new  ministers  are  pure  royalists.  Everything 
about  the  episode  means  counter-revolution."  The  feeling, 
that  the  appointment  of  this  ministry  was  virtually  a  declara- 
tion of  war  to  the  bitter  end  against  the  modern  society  of 
France,  was  widespread,  and  was  shared  by  all  parties. 
Journals  whose  loyalty  to  the  Bourbon  monarchy  was  un- 
impeachable attacked  the  new  ministry  at  once  and  in  the 
most  vigorous  fashion. 

Liberals  of  every  shade  began   to   organize   to  meet   the 


CONFLICT  BETWEEN  KING  AND  CHAMBER      91 

dangers  which  they  felt  were  coming.    Societies  were  formed.  Widespread 

Old    societies,    like    the    Carbonari,    renewed    their    activity.  J^^^f^  ^°" 

*'    to  the 

Men  began  to  say  that  the  House  of  Bourbon  and  a  con-  ministry, 
stitution  were  two  incompatible  terms.  A  faction  was  organ- 
ized to  prepare  the  way  to  the  throne  of  the  Duke  of 
Orleans.  Men  began  to  study  those  chapters  of  English 
history  which  told  how  one  prince  could  be  put  aside  for 
another  more  to  the  liking  of  the  nation.  The  groups  op- 
posed to  the  new  ministry  differed  widely  from  each  other 
in  belief  and  purpose,  Orleanists,  Bonapartists,  Republicans ; 
but  they  were  temporarily  united  in  a  common  opposition. 
Indignation  at  the  appointment  of  such  a  ministry  was  both 
widespread  and  deep,  and  became  all  the  more  vehement  when 
Polignac  declared  his  object  to  be  "  to  reorganize  society, 
to  restore  to  the  clergy  its  former  preponderance  in  the 
state,  to  create  a  powerful  aristocracy  and  to  surround  it 
with  privileges." 

For  the  time  being,  however,  the  ministry  remained   in-  Conflict 
active,  apparently  amazed  and  checked  by  the  remarkable 
ebullition  of  hostile  feeling  its  appointment  had  called  forth  and  the 
with  the  meeting  of  the  Chambers.     Early  in  March  1830  Chamber   of 
began  a  conflict  which,  short  and  sharp,  ended  in  the  over-     ^^^  ^^^' 
throw  and  exile  of  Charles  X.     The  King  opened  the  session 
with  a  speech  which   clearly  revealed  his   irritation   at  the 
Opposition,  and  his  emphatic  intention  to  support  the  min- 
istry.    The   Chamber   of  Deputies,   not   at   all   intimidated, 
replied  by  an  Address  to  the  King,  passed  by  a  vote  of  221 
to  181,  which  was  virtually  a  demand  for  the  dismissal  of 
the  unpopular  ministry,  that  thus  "  constitutional  harmony  " 
might  be  restored.    The  King  replied  by  declaring  that  "  his 
decisions  were  unchangeable,"  and  by  dissolving  the  Chamber, 
hoping  by  means  of  new  elections  to  secure  one  subservient 
to  his  will.     But  the  people  thought  otherwise.     The  elec- 
tions  resulted  in   a  crushing  defeat  for  the  King   and  his 
ministry.     Of  the  221  who  had  voted  for  the  Address,  202 
were  returned;  of  the   181   who  had  voted  against  it  only 


92        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

99  were  returned.  The  total  Opposition  was  increased  from 
221  to  270.  The  ministry  could  count  on  less  than  150 
votes  in  the  new  Chamber.  The  voters  had  spoken  decisively. 
This  Liberal  majority  was  not  opposed  to  the  monarchy. 
Had  the  King  been  willing  to  make  some  concessions,  had  he 
dismissed  the  ministry,  the  majority  of  the  Opposition  would 
have  been  satisfied.  Charles  X  was  urged  to  take  this  course 
by  the  most  absolute  of  rulers,  the  Emperor  Alexander,  and 
b}'  the  most  absolute  of  ministers,  Metternich.  Polignac  was 
willing  to  go.  But  Charles  had  so  conspicuously  identified 
himself  with  his  minister  that  yielding  on  that  point  seemed 
to  him  like  abdicating.  His  own  brother,  Louis  XVI,  had 
come  to  a  tragic  end,  he  said,  because  he  had  made  conces- 
sions. The  ministry  remained. 
^^^  Charles  was  unconquerably  stubborn.     Other  methods  of 

.  J  ,  gaining   his    ends   having    failed,   he   now   determined    upon 

coercion.  He  resolved  to  issue  a  series  of  ordinances  to  meet 
the  demands  of  the  situation.  The  ordinances  consequently 
appeared  in  the  Moniteur,  the  official  organ,  July  26,  1830. 
They  were  four  in  number.  The  first  suspended  the  liberty 
of  the  press.  For  the  publication  of  any  periodical  a  pre- 
liminary authorization  of  the  Government  was  thenceforth  to 
be  required.  This  authorization  must  be  renewed  every  three 
months  and  might  be  revoked  at  any  moment.  Thus  the  edi- 
tors of  France  could  not  lawfully  publish  another  issue  without 
obtaining  the  permission  of  the  Government.  This,  it  was 
supposed,  would  effectually  silence  the  opposition  press.  The 
second  ordinance  dissolved  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  just 
elected  and  overwhelmingly  against  the  ministry,  before  that 
Chamber  had  ever  met.  This  was  to  sport  with  the  voters' 
rights  to  choose  the  deputies  whom  they  desired.  The  reason 
assigned  for  this  step  was  that  during  the  late  elections 
methods  had  been  used  "  to  deceive  and  mislead  the 
electors."  To  prevent  the  recurrence  of  such  manoeuvers  a 
third  ordinance  was  issued  gravely  altering  the  electoral 
system.     The  number  of  deputies  was  reduced  again  to  258, 


I 


THE  JULY  ORDINANCES  93 

one-fifth  renewable  each  year.  The  property  quahfication 
for  the  suffrage  was  so  manipulated  as  practically  to  ex- 
clude the  rich  bourgeoisie,  merchants,  and  manufacturers, 
liberals  and  partisans  of  the  new  regime  born  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, and  to  lodge  political  power  almost  entirely  in  the 
hands  of  the  class  of  great  landed  proprietors,  chiefly  mem- 
bers of  the  nobility  of  the  old  regime.  The  electorate  was 
hereby  reduced  by  about  three-fourths.  Instead  of  about 
100,000  voters  there  were  now  to  be  about  25,000.  The 
fourth  ordinance  ordered  new  elections  and  fixed  the  date  for 
the  meeting  of  the  new  Chamber  of  Deputies  that  would 
emerge  from  those  elections. 

The  King  had  persuaded  himself  that  in  issuing  these  ordi-  Charles  X's 
nances  he  was  acting  not  against  the  Charter  but  in  con-  f  th 

formity  with  it.  He  based  his  right  upon  an  interpretation  charter, 
of  Article  14,  which  gave  him  the  power  to  make  "  the 
necessary  regulations  and  ordinances  for  the  execution  of 
the  laws  and  the  safety  of  the  state."  He  held  that  the  king 
alone  had  the  right  to  interpret  the  Charter,  as  the  king 
alone  had  granted  it.  His  interpretation  was  monstrous 
and  his  application  of  it  pure  absolutism,  since,  if  the  ordi- 
nances were  legal,  the  most  carefully  safeguarded  clauses 
of  the  Charter  could  be  made  null  and  void  bj'  the  monarch's 
act.  Needless  to  say,  the  Charter  did  not  give  the  king 
the  right  to  alter  or  abolish  the  fundamental  provisions  of 
the  Charter.  If  so  the  French  people  would  enjoy  their 
liberties  simply  at  the  humor  of  the  monarch.  Not  to  have 
opposed  these  ordinances  would  have  been  to  acquiesce  quietly 
in  the  transformation  of  the  French  government  into 
the  absolute  monarchy  of  the  time  of  Louis  XIV.  If  the 
French  cared  for  the  liberties  they  enjoyed,  they  could  not 
permit  this  action  of  the  King  to  stand.  They  must  repel 
the  assault  upon  their  political  system  to  whatever  extent 
might  be  necessary,  for  the  first  and  third  ordinances  were 
plainly  violations  of  the  Charter. 

Yet  Charles  X  and  his  minister,  Polignac,  were  confident 


94<       FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 

The   King's  that  there  would  be  no  trouble.       The  ordinances   affected 
mistaken 


judgment. 


they  said,  only  a  few  people — newspaper  men  and  those  who 
had  the  right  to  vote — an  exceedingly  small  minority.  No 
right  that  the  masses  of  the  people  enjoyed  was  infringed. 
The  people,  therefore,  would  have  no  motive  or  desire  to 
rise  to  aid  simply  the  privileged  few.  It  was  the  belief 
of  the  ministry  that  the  mass  of  the  nation  was  indifferent 
to  the  electoral  law  and  was  satisfied  with  material  pros- 
perity. The  Government,  entertaining  this  view  of  the 
situation,  took  no  serious  precautions  against  trouble.  The 
Minister  of  Police  assured  his  colleagues  that  Paris  would 
not  stir.  Charles  X,  having  signed  the  fateful  decrees, 
and  feeling  secure,  went  off  to  hunt  at  Rambouillet.  On 
his  return  that  evening  everything  was  quiet  and  the  Duchess 
of  Berry  congratulated  him  that  at  last  he  was  king. 
The    opposi-      The  constitutional  party,  in  truth,  was  poorly  organized 

0       e    £^^  resistance  and  moved  slowly.      The  ordinances  were  aimed 
liberal 
editors  of     ^^  ^^^  newspapers   and   the   Chamber.       The   Chamber  had 

Paris.  not    yet    met.       Its    members    were    scattered    over    France, 

although  some  were  in  Paris.  The  first  step  in  resistance 
was  taken  by  the  liberal  editors  of  Paris.  Under  the  leader- 
ship of  Tliiers  they  published  a  protest.  "  The  reign  of 
law  has  been  interrupted;  that  of  force  has  begun.  The 
Goverament  has  violated  the  law;  we  are  absolved  from 
obedience.  We  shall  attempt  to  publish  our  papers  without 
asking  for  the  authorization  which  is  imposed  upon  us.  The 
Government  has  this  day  lost  the  character  of  legality  which 
gives  it  the  right  to  exact  obedience.  We  shall  resist  it 
in  that  which  concerns  ourselves.  It  is  for  France  to 
decide  how  far  her  own  resistance  shall  extend."  On  the 
following  day  the  liberal  members  of  the  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties drew  up  a  formal  protest  against  the  ordinances,  but 
outlined  no  course  of  action.  The  Revolution  of  1830, 
however,  was  not  to  be  accomplished  by  the  journalists  or 
the  deputies. 

As   the   significance   of   the   ordinances   came  to   be   more 


THE  JULY  REVOLUTION  95 

clearly  seen,  popular  anger  began  to  manifest  itself.  Crowds 
assembled  in  the  streets  shouting  "  Down  with  the  Minis- 
try !  " ;  "  Long  live  the  Charter !  "  Fuel  was  added  to  the 
rising  flame  by  the  appointment  of  Marmont,  odious  as  a 
traitor  to  France  in  1814,  to  the  command  of  the  troops  in 
Paris.  The  workmen  of  the  printing  establishments,  thrown 
out  of  employment,  began  agitating,  and  other  workmen 
joined  them. 

On  Wednesday,  July  28,  civil  war  broke  out.  The  in-  The  July 
surgents  were  mainly  old  soldiers.  Carbonari,  and  a  group  of  Revolution, 
republicans  and  workmen — men  who  hated  the  Bourbons, 
who  followed  the  tricolor  flag  as  the  true  national  emblem, 
rather  than  the  white  flag  of  the  royal  house.  This  war 
lasted  three  days.  It  was  the  July  Revolution — the  Glorious 
Three  Days.  It  was  a  street  war  and  was  limited  to  Paris. 
The  insurgents  were  not  very  numerous,  probably  not  more 
than  ten  thousand.  But  the  Government  had  itself  prob- 
ably not  more  than  fourteen  thousand  troops  in  Paris.  The 
insurrection  was  not  difficult  to  organize.  The  streets  of 
Paris  were  narrow  and  crooked.  Through  such  tortuous 
lanes  it  was  impossible  for  the  Government  to  send  artillery, 
a  weapon  which  it  alone  possessed.      The  streets  were  paved  The 

with  large  stones.       These   co\ild  be   torn   up   and  piled  in  character 

,       „  <.         ,      •  '^         -.     of  the 

such  a  way  as  to  make  fortresses  lor  the  insurgents.      In  ggi^ting. 

the  night  of  the  27tli-28th  the  streets  were  cut  up  by  hun- 
dreds of  barricades  made  in  this  manner  of  paving  stones, 
of  overturned  wagons,  of  barrels  and  boxes,  of  furniture,  of 
trees  and  objects  of  every  description.  Against  such  ob- 
stacles the  soldiers  could  make  but  little  progress.  If  they 
overthrew  a  barricade  and  passed  on,  it  would  immediately  be 
built  up  again  behind  them  more  threatening  than  before 
because  cutting  their  line  of  reinforcements  and  of  possible 
retreat.  Moreover,  the  soldiers  had  only  the  flint-lock  gun, 
a  weapon  no  better  than  that  in  the  hands  of  insurgents. 
Again,  the  officers  had  no  knowledge  of  street  fighting,  where- 
as the  insurgents  had  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  city,  of 


96 


FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 


The 

ordinances 

withdrawn. 


The 

candidacy 
of  Louis 
Philippe. 


its  streets  and  lanes.  INIoreover,  the  soldiers  were  reluctant 
to  fight  against  the  people.  The  fighting  continued  two 
days  amid  the  fierce  heat  of  July.  About  six  hundred  lives 
were  lost.  Finally  Charles,  seeing  his  troops  worsted  and 
gradually  driven  back  out  of  the  city,  determined  to  with- 
draw the  ordinances.  His  messengers,  who  were  bringing 
this  news  to  the  insurgents,  were  greeted  with  cries  of  "  Too 
late,  too  late ! "  The  insurgents  were  no  longer  content 
with  the  withdrawal  of  the.  odious  measures  that  had  pre- 
cipitated the  contest.  They  would  have  nothing  more  to 
do  with  Charles  X.  But  the  determination  of  the  govern- 
ment to  succeed  his  was  a  delicate  matter.  Those  who  had 
done  the  actual  fighting  undoubtedly  wanted  the  republic. 
But  the  journalists  and  deputies  and  the  majority  of  the 
Parisians  were  opposed  to  such  a  solution.  They  now  took 
the  aggressive  and  skilfully  brought  forward  the  candidacy 
of  Louis  Philippe,  Duke  of  Orleans,  representing  a  younger 
branch  of  the  royal  family,  a  man  who  had  always  sympa- 
thized with  liberal  opinions.  On  July  30  appeared  a  mani- 
festo written  by  Thiers  in  the  interest  of  this  candidacy, 
running  as  follows :  "  Charles  X  may  no  longer  return  to 
Paris :  he  has  caused  the  blood  of  the  people  to  flow.  The 
Republic  would  expose  us  to  frightful  divisions ;  it  would 
embroil  us  with  Europe.  The  Duke  of  Orleans  is  a  prince 
devoted  to  the  cause  of  the  Revolution.  .  .  .  The  Duke  of 
Orleans  is  a  citizen  king.  The  Duke  of  Orleans  has  borne 
the  tricolors  in  the  heat  of  battle.  The  Duke  of  Orleans 
alone  can  again  bear  them ;  we  wish  no  others.  The  Duke 
of  Orleans  makes  no  announcement.  He  awaits  our  will. 
Let  us  proclaim  that  will  and  he  will  accept  the  Charter,  as 
we  have  always  understood  it  and  desired  it.  From  the 
French  people  will  he  hold  his  crown." 

On  the  following  day  the  deputies  who  were  in  Paris  met 
and  invited  the  Duke  of  Orleans  "  to  exercise  the  functions 
of  Lieutenant-General  of  the  Kingdom."  In  a  proclamation 
announcing  this  fact  to  the  people  it  was  stated :  "  He  will 


ABDICATION  OF  CHARLES  X  97 

respect  our  rights,  for  he  will  hold  his  from  us,"  The 
Duke  of  Orleans  accepted  the  position  until  the  opening 
of  the  Chambers  which  should  determine  upon  the  future  form 
of  government  for  France.  He  added,  "  The  Charter  shall 
henceforth  be  a  reality,"  But  the  transition  from  the  old 
to  the  new  was  not  jet  completed.  The  people,  who,  during 
these  three  hot  July  days,  had  done  the  actual  fighting, 
desired  a  republic.  They  had  their  quarters  at  the  Hotel 
de  Ville  and  must  be  reckoned  with.  The  final  decision  be- 
tween monarchy  and  republic  lay  in  the  hands  of  Lafayette, 
the  real  leader  of  the  Republicans.  It  was  of  the  highest 
importance  to  know  his  attitude. 

On  July  31  Louis  Philippe  rode  to  the  Hotel  de  Ville  dressed 
in  the  uniform  of  a  general  and  wearing  the  tricolor  cockade. 
He  appeared  on  the  balcony.  Lafayette  appeared  with 
him  and  embraced  him.  The  effect  of  the  little  pantomime 
was  instantaneous.  The  crowd  shouted  for  Louis  Philippe. 
This  popular  applause  ended  the  brief  hope  of  the  Repub- 
licans. The  crowd  virtually  gave  another  sovereign  to 
France. 

Charles  X  now  accepted  the  revolution.  He  abdicated,  as  Abdication 
did  his  eldest  son,  the  Duke  of  Angouleme,  in  favor  of  the  ° 
posthumous  son  of  the  late  Duke  of  Berry,  the  Duke  of 
Bordeaux,  later  well  known  in  the  history  of  France  as 
the  Count  of  Chambord  and  as  Henry  V,  the  title  he  would 
have  worn  had  he  ever  become  king.  The  leaders  of  the 
movement  had,  however,  other  ideas  concerning  the  future 
government  of  France.  They  wished  to  be  entirely  rid  of 
this  legitimate  royal  line.  Their  first  step  was  directed 
against  Charles  X  and  his  immediate  family.  Desiring  no 
repetition  of  the  experience  of  the  former  revolutionists  of 
having  a  king  as  prisoner  they  sent  troops  against  him  to 
frighten  him  out  of  the  country.  The  method  succeeded. 
Slowly  the  King  and  his  family  withdrew  toward  the  coast, 
whence  they  embarked  for  England  (August  14).  For 
two   years    Charles    X    lived    in    Great    Britain,    keeping    a 


98        FRANCE  DURING  THE  RESTORATION 


lonis 

Philippe 

King, 


The  end 

of  the 
Restora- 
tion. 


melancholy  court  in  Holyrood  Palace,  Edinburgh,  of  somber 
memory  in  the  life  of  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots.  Removing 
later  to  Austria,  he  died  in  1836. 

The  Chamber  of  Deputies,  whose  dissolution  by  Charles  X 
before  it  had  ever  come  together,  had  been  one  of  the  causes 
of  this  revolution,  organized  itself  August  3  and  undertook 
a  revision  of  the  Charter.  It  then  called  Louis  Philippe 
to  the  throne,  ignoring  the  claims  of  the  legitimate  prince, 
the  nine-year-old  Duke  of  Bordeaux.  The  revolution  was 
now  considered  over.  It  had  had  no  such  scope  as  had 
that  of  1789.  It  grew  out  of  no  deep-seated  abuses,  out 
of  no  crying  national  distress.  France  was  growing  every 
day  richer  and  more  prosperous.  It  was  an  unexpected, 
impromptu  affair.  Not  dreamed  of  July  25th,  it  was  over 
a  week  later.  One  king  had  been  overthrown,  another  created, 
and  the  Charter  slightly  modified.  Parliamentary  govern- 
ment had  been  preserved;  a  return  to  autocracy  prevented. 

The  essential  weakness  of  the  monarchy  of  the  Restoration 
was  shown  by  the  ease  with  which  it  was  terminated.  It 
always  labored  under  the  odium  of  its  origin,  having  been 
brought  back,  as  the  phrase  went,  *'  in  the  baggage  of 
the  Allies,"  the  enemies  and  vanquishers  of  France.  The 
very  presence  of  Louis  XVIII  and  Charles  X  in  France  was 
a  reminder  of  the  humiliation  of  that  country,  was  a  trophy 
of  her  enemies'  victories.  Moreover,  it  was  an  inevitable 
fatality  of  this  monarchy  that  its  natural  representatives 
and  counselors  had  been  long  in  exile,  did  not  understand 
the  complete  intellectual  transformation  of  their  country- 
men, had  themselves  always  lived  in  a  world  of  ideas  alien 
to  modern  France,  viewed  the  country  they  had  to  rule 
through  a  distorting  though  inevitable  medium  of  precon- 
ceptions, prejudices,  and  convictions.  The  Bourbon  mon- 
archy accomplished  much  that  was  salutary.  It  restored 
the  sadly  disordered  finances  of  the  nation.  Its  policy  in 
foreign  affairs,  in  Greece,  in  Algeria,  even  in  Spain,  gave 
general  satisfaction.    But  its  ideal  in  government  was  the 


ACCESSION  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE  99 

old,  aristocratic  regime  and  it  was  impelled  by  its  very 
nature  to  seek  to  approach  that  ideal.  When  it  approached 
too  near  it  suddenly  found  itself  toppled  over. 

This  ends  the  Restoration  and  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe 
now  begins.  Those  who  brought  about  the  final  overthrow 
of  the  elder  Bourbons  received  no  adequate  reward.  They 
had  the  tricolor  flag  once  more,  but  the  rich  bourgeoisie  had 
the  government.  The  Republicans  yielded,  but  without  re- 
nouncing their  principles  or  their  hopes.  Cavaignac,  one 
of  their  leaders,  when  thanked  for  the  abnegation  of  his 
party,  replied,  "  You  are  wrong  in  thanking  us ;  we  have 
yielded  because  we  are  not  yet  strong  enough.  Later  it 
will  be  different."  The  revolution,  in  fact,  gave  great 
impetus  to  the  doctrine  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people. 


CHAPTER  V 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


'^i^^-  The  influence  of  the  Revolution  of  1830  was  felt  all  ove:* 

„  Europe — in  Poland,  Germany,  Italy,  Switzerland,  England, 

the  July  &nd  the  Netherlands.  It  was  the  signal  and  encourage- 
Revolution.  ment  for  wide-spread  popular  movements  which  for  a  short 
time  seemed  to  threaten  the  whole  structure  erected  in  1815 
at  Vienna.  It  created  an  immediate  problem  for  the  rulers 
of  Europe.  They  had  bound  themselves  in  1815  to  guard 
against  the  outbreak  of  "  revolution,"  to  watch  over  and 
assure  the  "  general  tranquillity "  of  Europe.  They  had 
adopted  and  applied  since  then,  as  we  have  seen,  the  doctrine 
of  intervention  in  the  affairs  of  countries  infected  by  revolu- 
tionary fever,  as  the  great  preservative  of  public  order. 
Would  this  self-constituted  international  police  acquiesce  in 
the  overthrow  of  the  legitimate  king  of  France  by  the  mob 
of  Paris  .'^  Now  that  revolution  had  again  broken  out  in 
that  restless  country,  would  they  "  intervene  "  as  they  had 
done  in  Spain  and  Italy?  At  first  they  were  disposed  to 
do  so.  Metternich's  immediate  impulse  was  to  organize  a 
coalition  against  this  "  king  of  the  barricades."  But  when 
the  time  came  this  was  seen  to  be  impracticable,  for 
Russia  was  occupied  with  a  revolution  in  Poland, 
Powerless-  Austria  with  revolutions  in  Italy,  Prussia  with  simi- 
ness  of  tne  i^^^.  n^ovements  in  Germany,  and  England  was  engrossed  in 
Alliance  ^^^  most  absorbing  discussion  of  domestic  problems  she  had 
faced  in  many  decades.  Moreover,  England  approved  the 
revolution.  All  the  powers,  therefore,  recognized  Louis 
Philippe,  though  with  varying  indications  of  annoyance.  In 
one  particular,  consequently,  the  settlement  of  1815  was 
undone  forever.     The  elder  branch  of  the  House  of  Bourbon, 

100 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  THE  NETHERLANDS       101 

put  upon  the  throne  of  France  by  the  Allies  of  1815,  was 
now  pushed  from  it,  and  the  revolution,  hated  of  the  other 
powers,  had  done  it. 

THE  RISE  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  BELGIUM 

Another   part   of  the   diplomatic   structure   of   1815   was  The 

now  overthrown.      The  Congress  of  Vienna  had  created  an  ^^^^^^^^    ° 

1        ^-  Vienna    and 

essentially  artificial  state  to  the  north  of  France,  the  Kmg-  ^j^g  King- 
dom  of  the   Netherlands.      It  had  done  this   explicitly   for  dom   of  the 
the  purpose  of  having  a  barrier  against  France.      The  Bel-  Nether- 
gian   provinces,   hitherto   Austrian,    were    in    1815    annexed 
to  Holland  to  strengthen  that  state  in  order  that  it  might 
be  in  a  position  to  resist  attack  until  the  other  powers  should 
come   to  its   rescue.     The   Congress  had   also  declared   and 
guaranteed  the  neutrality  of  the  new  state  as  an  additional 
protection  against  an  aggressive  France. 

But  it  was  easier  to  declare  these  two  peoples  formally 
united  under  one  ruler  than  to  make  them  in  any  real  sense 
a  single  country.      Though  it  might  seem  by  a  glance  at 
the  map   that   the   peoples   of  this   little   comer  of  Europe 
must  be  essentially  homogeneous,  such  was  not  at  all  the  case. 
There  were  many  more  points  of  difference  than  of  similarity 
between   them.       Their   historic   evolution   had   not   been    at  -^  union 
all  the  same.      Except  under  the  overpowering  rule  of  Na-  . 
poleon  they  had  not  been  under  the  same  government  since  mentally 
1579.      Holland  had  been  a  republic.      The  Belgian  prov-  dissimilar 
inces  had  remained  subject  to  Spain  at  the  time  that  Hoi-  ^^°^  ^^' 
land  had  acquired  her  independence   and  had  later  passed 
under  Austrian  rule.     They  were  also  divided  by  language. 
The  Dutch  spoke   a   Teutonic   tongue,   the   Belgians   either 
Flemish,  a  Teutonic  speech,  yet  differing  from  the  Dutch, 
or  Walloon,  allied  to  the  French.     They  were  divided  by  re- 
ligion.    The  Dutch  were  Protestants  and  Calvinists ;  the  Bel- 
gians devoted  Catholics.     They  differed  in  their  economic  life 
and  principles.     The  Dutch  were  an  agricultural  and  com- 
mercial people  and  were  inclined  to  free  trade;  the  Belgians 


102 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


The  spirit 
of  nation- 
ality   awak- 
ened  among 
the 
Belgians. 


Difflcnlties 
in  the 
drafting 
of  the 
Constitu- 
tion. 


a  manufacturing  people  and  inclined  toward  protection. 
There  Avas  one  form  of  union,  however,  under  which  such  dis- 
similar peoples  might  have  lived  harmoniously  together — that 
of  a  personal  union.  Each  might  have  had  the  same  monarch 
but  have  kept  its  own  institutions  and  followed  its  own  line 
of  development.  But  at  Vienna  no  thought  was  given  to 
such  an  arrangement.  It  was  decided  that  the  union  should 
be  "  close  and  complete." 

This  was  the  first  disappointment  for  the  Belgians.  They 
had  hoped  that  henceforth  they  would  have  a  large  measure 
of  independence.  They  had  never  yet  constituted  a  nation. 
For  centuries  they  had  been  subject  to  the  Spaniards  and 
the  Austrians.  But  the  French  Revolution  had  powerfully 
aroused  the  longing  for  a  national  existence.  This  desire 
for  liberty  and  independence,  thwarted  in  1815,  operated 
with  growing  force  throughout  the  period  of  their  connection 
with  Holland.  The  Belgians  saw  themselves  simply  added  to 
and  subjected  to  another  people  inferior  in  numbers  to 
themselves. 

Friction  began  at  once.  The  king,  William  I,  had  prom- 
ised a  constitution  to  his  united  kingdom  and  appointed  a 
commission  to  draw  it  up.  The  commission  consisted  of 
an  equal  number  of  Dutch  and  Belgian  members.  There 
were  discussions  as  to  the  capital.  The  Dutch  desired 
Amsterdam ;  the  Belgians,  Brussels.  No  decision  was  pos- 
sible, and  it  was  decided  consequently  to  make  no  mention 
of  the  subject  in  the  Constitution.  It  was  agreed  that  there 
should  be  a  legislature  consisting  of  two  chambers,  an  Upper 
Chamber  appointed  by  the  king,  a  Lower  elected  by  the 
provincial  estates.  The  latter  was  to  be  composed  of  55 
Dutch  and  55  Belgian  members.  The  Belgians  objected 
to  this  equality,  saying  that  they  were  a  population  of  over 
three  million,  while  Holland  had  less  than  two  million.  Hol- 
land replied  that  it  had  been  a  sovereign  and  independent 
state  for  over  two  centuries  and  that  it  would  not  admit 
Belgian   predominance;   also  that  wealth   and  general  state 


AN  UNSATISFACTORY  UNION  103 

of  civilization  must  be  taken  into  account;  moreover,  that 
if  population  were  regarded  as  the  sole  basis  of  the  state 
Holland  had  a  right  to  count  in  her  colonies.  She  insisted 
upon  a  representation  at  least  equal  to  that  of  the  newly 
incorporated  territories.  As  neither  would  recognize  the 
predominance  of  the  other,  equality  of  representation  was  the 
only  possible  outcome. 

Equal  rights  were  granted  all  forms  of  worship.  This 
was  denounced  by  the  Belgian  Catholics.  The  Constitution 
gave  great  power  to  the  king.  The  legislative  bodies  could 
reject  but  not  amend  bills.  The  right  of  trial  by  jury 
was  not  guaranteed,  a  right  the  Belgians  had  enjoyed  under 
the  French  rule.  The  Constitution  was  now  submitted  to 
assemblies  of  the  two  peoples  for  approval.  The  Dutch 
assembly  accepted  it  but  the  Belgian  rejected  it.  Never- 
theless, by  an  arbitrary  exercise  of  power  the  King  declared 
it  in  force. 

A  union  so  inharmoniously  begun  was  never  satisfactory  Friction 
to   the  Belgians.       Friction   was    constant.       The   Belgians  between 

tll6 

objected  with  justice  that  the  officials  in  the  state  and  army  Dgig.ians 
were  almost  all  Dutch.    They  objected  to  the  King's  attempts  and  the 
to  force  the  Dutch  language  into  a  position  of  undue  privi-  Dutch, 
lege.      They  objected  to  the  system  of  taxation,  particularly 
to  two  odious  taxes  on  bread  and  meat,  now  imposed.      Re- 
ligious differences  inflamed  passions  still  further.      Though 
the  fact  remains  that  during  this  period  and  largely  because 
of  this   union  the  material  prosperity  of  the   Belgians  ad- 
vanced greatly,  still  the  union  never  became  popular.      The 
evident  desire  of  the  King  to  fuse  his  two  peoples  into  one 
was  a  constant  irritation.      The  system  was  more  and  more 
disliked  by  the  Belgians  as  the  years  went  by. 

Thus,  long  before  the  revolution  in  France,  there  was  a  The 
strong  movement  in  Belgium  in  favor  of  larger  liberty,  of  i»flTi«»ce   of 
self-government.     Few  as  yet,   however,  dreamed  of  a   dis-  devolution 
ruption  of  the  kingdom.      There  was  a  lively  sense  of  griev- 
ances too  long  endured.      The  July  Revolution  now  cam^ 


104 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


The 

Belgians 
declare 
their  inde- 
pendence. 


as  a  spark  in  the  midst  of  all  this  inflammable  material. 
On  August  25,  1830,  rioting  broke  out  in  Brussels.  It 
was  not  at  first  directed  toward  independence.  The  Bel- 
gians would  have  been  satisfied  if  each  country  could  have 
been  given  its  own  government  under  the  same  king.  The 
King  rejected  this  proposal  to  change  a  "  real "  into  a 
"  personal "  union.  His  troops  attempted  to  put  down  the 
insurrection.  There  were  in  September  several  days  of  fight- 
ing in  Brussels  as  there  had  been  in  Paris,  and  of  the  same 
character.  The  royal  troops  were  driven  out,  and  on  Octo- 
ber 4  the  Provisional  Government  that  had  arisen  out  of 
the  turmoil  declared  Belgium  independent  and  called  a  con- 
gress to  determine  the  future  form  of  government.  The 
King  now  prepared  to  make  concessions,  but  it  was  too  late. 
The  congress  decided  in  favor  of  a  monarchy  as  the  form 
of  government,  adopted  a  liberal  constitution,  and  at  the 
suggestion  of  England  and  France  elected  as  king  Leopold 
of  Coburg,  who  had  just  declined  the  new  throne  of  Greece, 
but  who  accepted  this. 

The  task  of  greatest  difficulty  was  to  get  the  new  kingdom 
recognized  by  the  Great  Powers,  which  in  1815  had  added 
Belgium  to  Holland.  Would  they  consent  to  the  undoing 
of  their  own  work.^*  The  king,  William  I,  was  resolved 
not  to  give  up  Belgium  and  was  preparing  to  reconquer  it, 
which  he  probably  could  have  done,  as  Belgium  had  no 
army.  Everything,  therefore,  depended  on  the  powers 
which  had  suppressed  revolution  in  Spain  and  Italy  ten 
years  before.  Would  they  do  it  again  in  the  interest  of 
the  treaties  of  1815.''  Now,  however,  they  were  divided,  and 
in  this  division  lay  the  salvation  of  the  new  state.  The 
Tsar  wished  to  intervene  in  order  "  to  oppose  an  armed 
barrier  to  the  progress  of  revolution."  Prussia  seemed  simi- 
larly inclined,  but  Louis  Philippe,  knowing  that  his  own 
throne  would  be  overthrown  by  the  Parisians  if  he  supinely 
allowed  these  absolute  monarchies  to  crush  the  new  liberties 
of  the  Belgians,  gave  exphcit  warning  that  if  they  inter- 


RISE  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  BELGIUM      105 

vened  France  also  would  intervene  against  them  "  in  order 

to  hold  the  balance  even  "  until  the  whole  question  should 

be  settled  by  the  powers,  in  congress  assembled. 

In  November,  1830,  an  insurrection  broke  out  in  Poland,  Interven- 

which  effectually  prevented  Russia  from  acting  in  the  Belgian  *^°^  °^  *^® 

matter,  caused  Prussia  to  fix  her  attention  upon  her  eastern  ^^jgg 

boundaries,  and  filled  Austria  with  apprehension.      Thus  the  prevented 

Holy   Allies,   hitherto    so   redoubtable    as   the   opponents   of  '^y  events 
1    ..  ,  ,  •  ...       in  Poland, 

revolutionary    movements    everywhere,    were   m    no    position 

to  stamp  out  such  a  movement  in  Belgium.      This  part  of 

the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna  had  consequently  been 

undone.      A  new  state  had  arisen  in  Europe  as  a  result  of 

revolution.      Its  revolutionary  origin,  however,  was  covered 

up  by  the  action  of  the  powers  in  now  consenting  to  it. 

Conferences  of  the  powers,  held  in  London  at  the  close  of 

1830    and   in    1831,    accepted    the    separation    of    Belgium 

from  Holland,  guaranteed  the  neutrality  of  the  new  king-  Recogni- 

dom,  and  sanctioned  the  choice  by  the  Belgians  of  Leopold  o    t  e 

;    .  1  .„.,,.        Kingdom    of 

as  their  ruler.      The  powers  had  the  satisfaction  of  knowing  Belgium. 

that  though  the  territorial  arrangements  of  Vienna  were 
altered,  France,  the  arch-enemy,  had  gained  nothing.  More- 
over, the  monarchical  principle  was  saved,  as  Belgium 
had  been  prevented  from  becoming  a  republic;  but  the 
new  monarchy  was  constitutional,  a  fact  pleasing  to 
England  and  France,  but  odious  to  the  three  eastern 
powers. 

The  success  of  the  Belgian  revolution  had  to  a  considerable 
extent  been  rendered  possible  by  a  revolution  in  Poland, 
which  ended  in  disastrous  failure.  Neither  Russia,  nor 
Prussia,  nor  Austria  would  have  acquiesced  so  easily  in 
the  dismemberment  of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  had 
they  not  feared  that  if  they  went  to  war  with  France  con- 
cerning it,  France  would  in  turn  aid  the  Poles,  and  the 
future  of  the  Poles  was  of  far  greater  immediate  importance 
to  them  than  the  future  of  the  Netherlanders.  The  French 
Revolution  of  1830  was  followed  by  the  rise  of  the  Kingdom 


106 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


of  Belgium ;  but  it  was  also  followed  by  the  disappearance 
of  the  Kingdom  of  Poland. 


The   resto- 
ration of 
the  King- 
dom  of 
Poland  in. 
1815. 


REVOLUTION  IN  POLAND 

Poland  had  been  down  to  the  last  quarter  of  the  eighteenth 
century  an  independent  state.  During  that  quarter  its  in- 
dependence had  been  destroyed  and  its  territory  seized  by  its 
three  neighbors,  Russia,  Prussia,  and  Austria,  in  the  famous 
partitions  of  1772,  1793,  and  1795.  But  the  Polish  people's 
passionate  love  of  country  was  not  destroyed  and  their  hope 
that  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  France  would  restore 
their  independence  was  intense.  It  was,  however,  destined 
to  disappointment.  But  with  the  fall  of  Napoleon  hope 
sprang  up  in  another  quarter.  Alexander  I,  Tsar  of  Rus- 
sia, was  in  1815  filled  with  generous  and  romantic  aspira- 
tions and  was  for  a  few  years  a  patron  of  liberal  ideas  in 
various  countries.  Under  the  influence  of  these  ideas  he 
conceived  the  plan  of  restoring  the  old  Kingdom  of  Poland. 
Poland  should  be  a  kingdom  entirely  separate  from  the  Em- 
pire of  Russia.  He  should  be  Emperor  of  Russia  and  King 
of  Poland.  The  union  of  the  two  states  would  be  simply 
personal. 

Alexander  had  desired  to  restore  Poland  to  the  full  extent 
of  its  possessions  in  the  eighteenth  centui'y.  To  render 
this  possible  Prussia  and  Austria  must  relinquish  the  prov- 
inces they  had  acquired  in  the  three  partitions.  This,  as 
we  have  seen,  was  not  accomplished  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna.  There  were  henceforth  four  Polands — Prussian 
Poland,  Austrian  Poland,  Russian  Poland,  and  a  new  small 
independent  Poland,  created  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  the 
Republic  of  Cracow.  The  new  Polish  kingdom,  erected  by 
Alexander  I  in  1815,  was  then  simply  a  part  of  historic 
Poland,  nor  did  it  indeed  include  all  of  the  Pohsh  territories 
that  Russia  had  acquired. 

Of  this  new  state  Alexander  was  to  be  king.  To  it  he 
granted  toward  the  close  of  1815  a  Constitution.     There  was 


POLAND  A  CONSTITUTIONAL  KINGDOM    107 

to  be  a  Diet  meeting  every  two  years.      This  was  to  consist  Alexander  I 

of   a   Senate,   nommatcd   by    the    kina;,   and   of   a    Chamber 

•^  .  constitu- 

of  Nuncios,  elected  by  the  assemblies  of  the  nobles  and  by  tion  to 
the  communes.  Tlie  latter  chamber  was  to  be  elected  for  Poland, 
six  years,  one-third  renewable  every  two  years.  Roman 
Catholicism  was  recognized  as  the  state  religion ;  but  a 
generous  measure  of  toleration  was  given  to  other  sects. 
Liberty  of  the  press  was  guaranteed,  subject  to  laws  de- 
signed to  prevent  its  abuse.  The  Polish  language  was 
made  the  official  language.  All  positions  in  the  govern- 
ment were  to  be  filled  by  Poles,  not  by  Russians.  No  people 
in  central  Europe  possessed  such  liberal  institutions  as  those 
with  which  the  Poles  were  now  invested.  A  prosperous 
career  as  a  constitutional  monarchy  seemed  about  to  begin. 
The  Poles  had  never  enjoyed  so  much  civil  freedom,  and 
they  were  now  receiving  a  considerable  measure  of  home-rule. 

But    this    regime,    well-meant    and    full    of    promise,    en-  Friction 

countered   obstacles    from   the    start.       The    Russians    were  ^^tween 

.  1  Ti  1       1  -11     *^6  Poles 

opposed  to  the  idea  of   a  restored  Poland,  and  particularly^  ^^^  ^^^ 

to  a  constitutional  Poland,  when  they  themselves  had  no  Russians, 
constitution.  Why  should  their  old  enemy  be  so  greatly 
favored  when  they,  the  real  supporters  of  the  Tsar,  were 
not.''  The  hatred  of  Russians  and  Poles,  a  fact  centuries 
old,  continued  undiminished.  Moreover,  what  the  dominant 
class  of  Poles  desired,  far  more  than  liberal  government,  was 
independence.  They  could  never  forget  the  days  of  their 
prosperity.  Unfortunately  they  had  not  the  wisdom  or 
self-control  to  use  their  present  considerable  liberties  for 
the  purpose  of  building  up  the  social  solidarity  which  Poland 
had  always  lacked  by  redressing  the  crying  grievances  of 
the  serfs  against  the  nobles,  by  making  all  Poles  feel  that 
they  were  a  single  people  rather  than  two  classes  of  oppres- 
sors and  oppressed.  They  "did  not  seek  gradually  to  de- 
velop under  the  aegis  of  their  constitution  a  true  and  vigor- 
ous nationality,  which  might  some  day  be  strong  enough  to 
win  its  independence,  but  they  showed  their  dissatisfaction 


108 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


Influence 
of  the  July 
Revolution. 


The    Polish 
expectation 
of  foreign 
aid  disap- 
pointed. 


with  the  limited  powers  Alexander  had  granted  and  shortly 
became  obstructive  and  censorious — conduct  lacking  in  tact 
and  judgment. 

The  Diet  criticized  certain  acts  of  the  Tsar's  officials  and 
the  Tsar  warned  the  Diet.  Friction  developed  from  time 
to  time,  and,  moreover,  as  the  years  went  by,  Alexander's 
early  liberalism  faded  away.  His  successor,  Nicholas  I, 
who  came  to  the  throne  in  1825,  was  a  thorough-going 
absolutist.  The  spirit  of  unrest  was  strong  among  the  mass 
of  the  lesser  Polish  nobility,  a  class  little  accustomed  to  self- 
control  and  also  strongly  influenced  by  the  democratic  ideas 
of  Western  Europe.  This  party  was  now  inflamed  by  the 
reports  of  the  successful  revolution  in  France;  by  the  belief 
that  the  French  would  aid  them  if  they  strove  to  imitate  their 
example.  When,  therefore,  the  Tsar  summoned  the  Polish 
army  to  prepare  for  a  campaign  whose  object  was  the  sup- 
pression of  the  Belgian  revolution,  the  determination  of  the 
Liberals  was  quickly  made.  They  rose  in  insurrection  on 
the  29th  of  November,  1830.  The  Russian  Grand  Duke 
Constantine  was  driven  from  Warsaw.  The  revolutionists 
first  tried  negotiation  with  the  Tsar,  hoping  in  this  way 
to  secure  their  demands  for  larger  political  liberty.  The 
attempt  failed,  but  consumed  time  which  the  revolutionists 
could  have  used  to  much  better  advantage  in  arousing  and 
organizing  the  country.  When  the  Tsar  sent  word  that 
Poland  had  but  two  alternatives — unconditional  submission 
or  annihilation — then  the  more  radical  revolutionists  seized 
control  of  the  movement,  declared  that  the  House  of  Roman- 
off had  ceased  to  rule  in  Poland,  and  prepared  for  a  life  and 
death  struggle. 

Russia's  military  resources,  however,  were  so  great  that 
Poland  could  not  hope  alone  to  achieve  her  national  inde- 
pendence. The  Poles  expected  foreign  intervention,  but  no  in- 
tei^vention  came.  Enthusiasm  for  the  Poles  was  widespread 
among  the  people  in  France,  in  England,  and  in  Germany. 
But  the  Governments,  none  of  which  was  controlled  by  public 


THE  POLISH  INSURRECTION  109 

opinion,  refused  to  move.  Louis  Philippe,  feeling  his  new 
throne  quite  insecure,  did  not  wish  to  hazard  it  in  the  vicissi- 
tudes of  a  war.  The  revolution  from  which  he  had  himself 
profited  was  a  half-way  affair.  Revolutionary  flames  feed 
each  other.  If  France  should  aid  Poland  the  restless  elements 
at  home  would  be  encouraged  to  go  further  and  insist 
upon  a  thorough  change  in  France  which  would  endanger 
his  position.  England  was  not  disposed  to  injure 
Russia,  which  might  somewhere  else  wreak  vengeance 
upon  her.  Prussia  and  Austria  felt  that  an  independent 
Poland  would  be  a  menace  to  them,  as  it  would  seek  to 
win  their  Polish  possessions.  Moreover,  patrons  of 
reaction  as  they  were,  ought  they  to  become,  for  no 
reason  better  than  a  popular  sentiment,  patrons  of 
revolution  ? 

Thus  Poland  was  left  to  fight  alone  with  Russia  and  of  The  failure 

the  outcome  there  could  be  no  doubt.       The  Poles   fought  °^  *^^  }^' 

snTrftcljJQii 
with   great   bravery,   but   without   good   leadership,   without 

careful  organization,  without  a  spirit  of  subordination  to 
military  authorities.  The  war  went  on  from  January  1831 
until  September  of  that  year,  when  Warsaw  fell  before 
the  Russians.  The  results  of  this  ill-advised  and  ill-executed 
insurrection  were  deplorable  in  the  extreme.  Poland  ceased 
to  exist  as  a  separate  kingdom  and  became  merely  a  province 
of  the  Russian  Empire.  Its  Constitution  was  abolished  and 
it  was  henceforth  ruled  with  great  severity  and  arbitrariness. 
The  insurgents  were  savagely  punished.  Many  were  exe- 
cuted, many  sent  to  Siberia.  Thousands  of  Polish  officers 
and  soldiers  escaped  to  the  countries  of  western  Europe  and 
became  a  restless  element  in  Paris,  Berlin,  and  Vienna,  al- 
ways ready  to  fight  for  liberty.  Even  the  Polish  language 
seemed  doomed,  so  repressive  was  the  policy  now  followed 
by  Russia.  The  Poles'  sole  satisfaction  was  a  highly 
altruistic  one,  that  by  their  revolt  they  had  contributed 
greatly  to  the  success  of  the  revolutions  in  France  and 
Belgium. 


110 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


Italy   after 
the    revolu- 
tions of 
1820. 


Revolu- 
tionary 
movements 
in    1831. 


The 

Italians 
receive  no 
help  from 
France. 


REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY 

Another  country  which  felt  the  revolutionary  wave  of 
1830  was  Italy.  The  revolutions  of  1820  and  1821  had 
occurred  in  northern  and  southern  Italy.  They  had  been 
easily  crushed,  largely  by  Austrian  arms.  During  the  next 
decade  Austrian  influence  weighed  ever  more  heavily  upon 
the  peninsula.  Discontent  with  existing  conditions  was 
general.  The  various  governments  were  despotic,  reaction- 
ary, unenlightened.  The  Carbonari  were  constantly  plot- 
ting new  insurrections.  In  1830  Prince  Metternich  de- 
clared Italy  to  be  of  all  European  lands  the  one  which 
had  the  greatest  tendency  to  revolution. 

Metternich's  diagnosis  was  destined  to  immediate  vindica- 
tion. Revolutions  broke  out  in  the  states  of  central  Italy 
in  1831.  The  Prince  of  Modena  and  the  Duchess  of  Parma, 
Marie  Louise,  the  former  Empress,  were  forced  to  flee  from 
their  states.  More  serious  was  the  rising  in  the  Papal 
States  against  the  government  of  the  priests.  In  the  Ro- 
magna,  the  northern  part  of  the  Papal  States,  Bologna,  the 
center  of  the  disturbance,  declared  the  temporal  power  of 
the  Papacy  at  an  end.  Nearly  every  town  in  the  States 
except  Rome  joined  the  movement. 

The  revolutionists  expected  the  inevitable  hostility  of 
Austria  but  hoped  for  the  support  of  France  as  well  as 
of  the  people  in  other  Italian  states.  But  France  was  a 
most  uncertain  reed.  Louis  Philippe  desired  peace  above 
all  things,  not  wishing  to  risk  his  newly  acquired  power 
in  the  chances  of  a  war  so  far  away  and  with  so  strong 
a  state  as  Austria.  His  prime  minister  declared  in  a  cele- 
brated speech  that  "  French  blood  belongs  to  France  alone," 
a  phrase  odious  to  all  Liberals  as  in  it  there  was  only  egoism. 
Louis  Philippe,  too,  was  probably  influenced  by  fear  of  the 
rise  anew  of  Bonapartism  out  of  an  Italian  war.  The  two 
sons  of  Louis  Napoleon  of  Holland  had  offered  their  services 
to   the   Italian    insurgents.       Further,    might   not   Austria, 


AUSTRIAN  INTERVENTION  IN  ITALY      111 

irritated,  permit  Napoleon's  son,  the  Duke  of  Rcichstadt, 
now  a  virtual  prisoner  at  Vienna,  to  return  to  France,  in 
which  case  Louis  Philippe's  power  would  probably  founder 
quickly?  Feeling  his  position  strong,  Metternich  decided 
to  intervene  and  suppress  the  insurrection.  Austrian  troops 
were  sent  southward.  The  exiled  rulers  were  easily  restored. 
The  Pope  recovered  his  provinces.  But  a  conference  of 
the  five  great  powers  at  this  juncture  demanded  that  he 
carry  out  extensive  reforms,  mainly  in  the  direction  of  put- 
ting the  government  into  the  hands  of  laymen.  The  Aus- 
trian forces  were  then  withdrawTi.  But  the  papal  promises, 
not  being  kept,  insurrection  broke  out  again  in  1832.  Again 
the  Papal  Government  was  powerless  to  maintain  itself.  The 
Austrians  once  more  crossed  the  frontier,  at  the  re-  Austrian 
quest  of  the  Pope.  But  this  time  France  intervened,  not  i^^terven- 
in  tlie  interest  of  the  Italians  but,  as  she  held,  in  the  general 
interest  of  the  European  equilibrium  which  would  be  upset 
by  the  predominance  of  Austria  in  Italy.  Asserting  that 
she  had  as  good  a  right  to  be  in  the  Papal  States  as  had 
Austria,  she  seized  the  fortress  of  Ancona,  announcing  that 
she  proposed  to  stay  there  as  long  as  Austrian  troops  I'e- 
niained.  All  this  was  a  mere  episode  in  the  game  of  the 
balance  of  power.  The  two  powers  watched  each  other  on 
the  Pope's  domains  until  1838  when,  the  Austrians  having 
withdrawn  their  troops,  France  gave  up  Ancona.  Absolu- 
tism was  restored  in  the  Papal  States  and  in  the  duchies. 

Thus    another    attempt    of   Italians    to    direct    their    own  The    results 

affairs  had  failed.      The  leaders  were  incapable,  the  odds  too 

insurrec- 
great.      But  there  were  certain  results  of  importance.      The  ^jQ^g^ 

absolute  necessity  of  driving  Austria  out  of  the  peninsula, 

if  the  peninsula  was  ever  to  have  a  career  of  its  own,  was 

proved  once  more ;   also   the   difficulty   of  driving  her  out. 

The  hostility  of  the  Papacy  to  any  such  project  was  again 

shown.     The  temporal  power  of  the  Pope  had  by  some  of  his 

own  subjects  been  declared  at  an  end — a  suggestive  precedent. 

The  ambition  of  the  leaders,  too,  had  been  to  make  Rome 


112 


REVOLUTIONS  BEYOND  FRANCE 


Revolution 

in 

Germany. 


New 

measures 
of  re- 
pression. 


the  capital  of  a  new  state  of  Italy.  The  revolutions  of 
1820  and  1821  had  mainly  been  the  work  of  military  circles. 
The  movements  of  1831  and  1832  were  joined  by  many 
merchants  and  laborers.  Liberalism  was  appealing  with 
increasing  force  to  classes  of  the  population  hitherto  passive 
or  ignored.  Liberalism  was  becoming  more  democratic. 
But  for  the  time  being  reaction  again  held  sway  in  Italy. 

REVOLUTION  IN  GERMANY 

Thus  in  1830  revolution  raged  with  varying  vehemence 
all  about  Germany — in  France,  in  Belgium,  in  Poland,  and 
in  Italy.  The  movement  also  affected  Germany  itself.  In 
Brunswick,  Saxony,  Hesse-Cassel,  and  in  two  Saxon  duchies 
revolutionary  movements  broke  out  with  the  result  that  sev- 
eral new  constitutions  were  added  to  those  already  granted. 
The  new  ones  were  chiefly  in  North  German,  whereas  the 
earlier  ones  had  been  mainly  in  South  German  states.  But 
the  two  great  states,  Austria  and  Prussia,  passed  unscathed 
and  set  themselves  to  bring  about  a  reaction,  as  soon  as 
the  more  pressing  dangers  in  Poland  and  Italy  and  France 
were  over,  and  they  themselves  felt  secure.  Using  certain 
popular  demonstrations,  essentially  insignificant,  with  all  the 
effect  with  which  he  had  previously  used  the  Wartburg 
festival,  Mettemich  succeeded  in  carrying  reaction  further 
than  he  had  been  able  to  even  in  the  Carlsbad  Decrees  of 
1819.  Those  decrees  were  aimed  chiefly  at  the  universities 
and  the  press.  New  regulations  were  adopted  in  1832  and 
1834  by  which  he  secured  not  only  the  renewal  of  these  but 
the  enactment  of  additional  repressive  measures. 

In  1832  six  new  articles  were  adopted  by  the  Diet  of 
the  Confederation,  by  which  the  suppression  of  liberalism  was 
rendered  more  thorough  than  ever.  By  them  every  German 
sovereign  was  bound  to  refuse  any  petition  of  his  local  assem- 
bly that  might  impair  his  sovereignty;  every  assembly  was 
forbidden  to  refuse  its  sovereign  the  taxes  necessary  to  carry 
on   the   government   or   to   use   the   taxing  power   to   force 


REPRESSION  IN  GERMANY  113 

concessions  from  the  prince,  or  to  pass  any  laws  prejudicial 
to  the  objects  of  the  Confederation.  A  committee  was  to 
be  appointed  by  the  Diet  to  watch  over  the  legislation  of 
the  different  states,  and  to  report  all  measures  that  threat- 
ened the  rights  of  the  Diet  or  of  the  individual  sovereigns. 
The  Federal  Diet  was  made  a  kind  of  Supreme  Court  with 
power  to  interpret  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  Confedera- 
tion and  to  decide  what  state  laws  were  inconsistent  with 
them,  that  is,  were  unconstitutional. 

The  Diet  also  passed  other  repressive  measures  forbidding  Metternich 
political  societies,  public  meetings,  and  revolutionary  badges,  ^^P'^^™^ 
and  promising  aid  to  sovereigns  in  case  of  need.  The  de- 
crees against  the  universities  were  enforced  with  renewed 
vigor.  Thus  not  only  universities,  but  chambers  of  deputies 
were  now  under  the  Metternich  system.  This  was  Metter- 
nich's  crowning  achievement  in  Germany.  Again  a  persecu- 
tion of  professors,  students,  and  journalists,  surpassing  pre- 
vious ones,  was  instituted.  Obstinate  chambers  of  deputies 
were  dissolved.  Constitutional  life  in  the  few  states  where  it 
existed  was  reduced  to  a  minimum.  The  political  history  of 
Germany  offers  but  little  interest  until  the  great  mid-century 
uprising  of  1848  shook  this  entire  system  of  negation  and 
repression  to  the  ground. 


CHAPTER  VI 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


The    career 
of   Louis 
Philippe, 
1773-1850. 


His 

liberalism. 


Louis  Philippe,  the  new  monarch  of  the  French,  was 
already  in  his  fifty-seventh  year.  He  was  the  son  of  the 
notorious  PhiHppe  Egalite,  who  had  intrigued  during  the 
Revolution  for  the  throne  occupied  by  his  cousin,  Louis  XVI, 
had,  as  a  member  of  the  Convention,  voted  for  the  latter's 
execution,  and  had  himself  later  perished  miserably  on 
the  scaffold.  In  1789  Louis  Philippe  was  only  sixteen 
years  of  age,  too  young  on  the  whole  to  play  a  political 
role,  though  he  became  a  member  of  the  Jacobin  Club.  Later, 
when  the  war  broke  out,  he  joined  the  army  of  his  country 
and  fought  valiantly  at  Valmy  and  Jemappes.  Becoming 
suspected  of  treason  he  fled  from  France  in  1793  and  entered 
upon  a  life  of  exile  that  was  to  last  twenty-one  years.  He 
went  to  Switzerland,  where  he  lived  for  a  while,  teaching 
geography  and  mathematics  in  a  school  in  Reichenau.  Leav- 
ing there  when  his  incognito  was  discovered  he  traveled  as 
far  north  as  the  North  Cape,  and  as  far  west  as  the  United 
States.  He  finally  settled  in  England  and  lived  on  a  pension 
granted  by  the  British  Government.  Returning  to  France 
on  the  fall  of  Napoleon  he  was  able  to  recover  a  large  part 
of  the  family  property,  which,  though  confiscated  during  the 
Revolution,  had  not  been  actually  sold.  During  the  Restora- 
tion he  lived  in  the  famous  Palais  Royal  in  the  very  heart 
of  Paris,  cultivating  relations  that  might  some  day  prove 
useful,  particularly  appealing  to  the  solid,  rich  bourgeoisie 
by  a  display  of  liberal  sentiments  and  by  a  good-humored, 
unconventional  mode  of  life.  He  walked  the  streets  of  Paris 
alone,  talked,  and  even  drank  with  workmen  with  engaging 
bonhomie,  and  sent  his  sons  to  the  public  schools  to  associate 

114 


THE  CAREER  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE  115 

with  the  sons  of  the  bourgeoisie — a  delicate  comphment  fully 
appreciated  by  the  latter.  His  palace  was  the  meeting  place 
for  the  liberal,  artistic,  intellectual  society  of  Paris.  Here 
certainly  was  a  prince  as  nearly  republican  as  a  prince  could 
be.  The  rights  won  by  the  Revolution  would  surely  not  be 
endangered  by  a  man  who  so  easily  adapted  himself  to  the 
new  ideas  that  had  come  into  the  world  with  the  great  up- 
heaval. Frenchmen,  who  dreaded  the  idea  of  a  republic, 
discredited  by  the  horrors  of  the  Revolution,  and  who  wished 
to  do  away  with  the  old-style  monarchy,  revived  by  Charles 
X,  might  naturally  be  hopeful  of  combining  the  advantages 
of  both  and  avoiding  the  evils  of  both  by  placing  so  amiable 
and  enlightened  a  prince  in  power. 

Thus  the  legend  grew  up,  carefully  fostered,  that  here 
was  a  prince  who  put  patriotism  above  self-interest,  who 
had  fought  and  suffered  for  his  country.  It  was  not  known 
then,  or  in  1830,  that  he  had  sought  to  fight  against  it 
during  Napoleon's  reign,  nor  was  it  known  that  under  this 
exterior  of  ostentatious  liberalism  there  lay  a  strong  ambi- 
tion for  personal  power,  a  nature  essentially  autocratic, 
thoroughly  imbued  with  extreme  monarchical  principles. 
Louis  Philippe  had  learned  the  arts  of  intrigue,  of  self- 
control,  of  silent,  incessant  exploitation  of  circumstances  for 
his  own  advancement. 

Such  was  the  man  who  in  1830  became  king,  called  upon  His  legal 
to  govern  a  country  in  a  sea  of  troubles.  His  legal  title  *^*^^  *°  *^® 
to  the  throne  was  very  weak,  his  actual  position  for  man}' 
years  most  precarious.  He  had  been  invited  to  ascend  the 
throne  simply  by  the  Chamber  of  Deputies — a  chamber,  more- 
over, which  had  been  legally  dissolved,  which,  furthermore, 
had  never  been  authorized  to  choose  a  king,  which  was, 
therefore,  giving  away  something  it  did  not  possess.  More- 
over, of  that  chamber  of  430  members  only  252  took  part  in 
the  vote,  219  in  favor  of  Louis  Philippe,  33  opposed.  The 
Chamber  of  Peers  concurred,  but  its  concurrence  merely 
emphasized     its    nullity     in    the    whole    proceeding.       The 


lie  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

choice  of  the  new  king  was  never  submitted  to  the  people  for 
ratification,  was  never  even  submitted  to  the  voters,  who 
numbered  about  a  hundred  thousand.  Louis  Philippe  was 
virtually  the  elect  of  219  deputies  who,  in  turn,  had  no  legal 
standing.  Though  the  people  of  France  acquiesced  in  the 
new  regime,  they  never  formally  sanctioned  it.  The  new 
king,  in  order  to  show  clearly  the  break  with  the  past, 
assumed  the  name  Louis  Philippe,  rather  than  Philip  VII. 
The  Con-  The  Chamber  of  Deputies,  before  calling  Louis  Philippe 

stitution  to  the  throne,  drew  up  a  Constitution  to  which  he  took  oath. 
The  Constitution  was  really  a  revision  of  the  Charter  oi 
1814  in  those  articles  which  had  occasioned  trouble  during 
the  last  fifteen  3'ears,  or  which  seemed  inconsistent  with  the 
new  monarchy.  The  fatal  Article  14  was  modified  to  read, 
"  The  king  issues  the  ordinances  necessary  for  the  execution 
of  the  laws  but  never  has  power  to  suspend  the  laws  or 
prevent  their  execution."  Another  change  was  that  the 
right  of  initiating  legislation  should  no  longer  belong  simply 
to  the  king,  but  should  be  enjoyed  by  both  chambers.  The 
sessions  of  the  Chamber  of  Peers  were  made  public  like  those 
of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 

Instead  of  the  formula,  "  the  Catholic  religion  is  the  re- 
ligion of  the  state,"  a  phrase  that  denoted  a  position  of  pri^^- 
lege,  a  new  formula  appeared  to  the  effect  that  that  religion 
was  "  professed  by  the  majority  of  the  French."  It  was 
explicitly  provided  that  the  censorship  should  never  be  re- 
established. Article  67  said,  "  France  resumes  its  colors. 
For  the  future,  no  other  cockade  shall  be  worn  than  the 
tricolor  cockade."  Thus  the  flag  of  the  Revolution,  lustrous 
with  victories  on  a  hundred  battlefields,  replaced  the  white 
banner  of  the  Bourbons.  The  preamble  of  the  Charter  of 
1814  was  suppressed  because  it  sanctioned  the  theory  of 
monarchy  by  divine  right  and  because  in  it  the  king  con- 
descended to  grant  Frenchmen  rights  as  an  act  of  royal 
pleasure,  which  they  considered  belonged  to  them  inherently. 
In  most  other  respects  the  Charter  of  1814  remained  un- 


CHARACTER  OF  THE  JULY  MONARCHY   117 

altered.  The  age  qualification  was  reduced  for  deputies 
to  thirty  years,  for  voters  to  twenty-five.  It  was,  however, 
stated  in  the  revision  that  the  electoral  system  should  be 
determined  by  ordinary  law,  thus  providing  for  a  super- 
session of  the  existing  method.^ 

A  law  was  accordingly  passed  in  1831  establishing  the  sys-  The  fran- 
tem  that  was  destined  to  remain  in  force  until  1848.  The  law  j^^^j.^^ 
of  the  double  vote  was  rescinded.  The  franchise,  hitherto 
given  only  to  those  paying  a  direct  property  tax  of  300 
francs,  was  now  extended  to  those  paying  one  of  200  francs. 
The  qualification  was  reduced  to  100  francs  in  the  case  of 
certain  professional  classes,  the  "  capacities,"  so-called,  law- 
yers, physicians,  judges,  professors.  Thus  the  electorate 
was  doubled.  But  France  was  still  far  from  democracy.  At 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  the  voters  numbered  about  two 
hundred  thousand  out  of  a  population  of  about  thirty  mil- 
lions. France  was  still  governed  by  the  propertied  classes, 
by  an  aristocracy  of  wealth.  Under  the  July  Monarchy  the 
bourgeoisie  enjoyed  a  practical  monopoly  of  power. 

There  was   from  the  beginning  a  division  of  opinion   as  The  char- 
to  the  character  of  the  new  monarchy.      Did  Louis  Philippe  jj^^_ 
rule  by  divine  right,  or  did  he  rule  by  the  will  of  the  people,  archy. 
expressed  by  their  deputies.-^      The  very  nature  of  the  July 
Revolution    showed   that    the    former    claim   was    untenable. 
That   revolution   had   been    made  by   the   people   of   Paris 
against  the  monarch  who  ruled  by  divine  right.      Even  with 
Charles  X  out  of  the  way  his  legitimate  successor  was  not 
Louis  PhiHppe  but  the  little  Duke  of  Bordeaux.      But  did 
the  accession  of  this  prince  to  the  throne  prove  on  the  other 
hand  that  all  sovereignty  was  vested  in  the  people.''      Many 
claimed  that  such  was  the  case,  that  the  people  of  France 
had  virtually  elected  Louis  Philippe  king,  that  they  might 
with  equal  propriety  have  elected  any  one  else,  that  having 
elected  him  they  could  dismiss  him.      The  opponents  of  those 

*  The   constitution   is    given   in    full   in   Anderson,   Constitutions  and 
Documents,  No.  105. 


118  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

who  licld  this  view  declared  that  this  was  to  make  the  July 
Monarchy  virtually  a  republic,  and  the  fact  remained  that 
the  republic  had  been  deliberately  rejected.  This  party 
argued  that  the  new  monarchy  was  peculiar — ^that  the 
basis  of  the  new  system  was  a  kind  of  contract  between 
the  king  and  the  nation;  that  neither  was  absolutely  sov- 
ereign, but  that  each  possessed  a  part  of  the  sovereignty ; 
that  thus  each  was  indispensable  to  the  other,  each  incom- 
plete without  the  other;  that  France  did  not  recognize  with- 
out qualification  the  doctrine  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people, 
or  that  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  monarch;  that  the  fusion 
of  the  two,  inevitable,  complete,  was  the  basis  of  the  state; 
that  the  true  theory  of  the  monarchy  was  that  expressed 
in  Louis  Philippe's  phrase  that  he  was  "  king  by  the  grace 
of  God  and  the  will  of  the  nation." 
Insecurity  Not  only  was  the  legal  basis  of  the  July  Monarchy  un- 

of  the  new  certain,  but  its  practical  hold  on  France  was  most  precarious. 
It  was  forced  to  devote  the  first  half  of  its  life  to  the  prob- 
lem of  getting  solidly  established.  Improvised  at  the  mo- 
ment of  revolution,  cleverly  set  up  in  the  midst  of  general 
confusion,  it  was  singularly  lacking  in  all  the  qualities  that 
impose  upon  mankind,  that  command  immediate  respect,  that 
indicate  the  possession  of  authority  and  power.  There  was 
nothing  majestic  about  its  origin.  It  had  no  roots.  De- 
vised by  the  rich  bourgeoisie,  it  seemed  the  expression  of 
purely  business  considerations.  Whether  it  could  captivate 
the  sentiments  of  France,  could  throw  about  itself  the  glamour 
that  usually  hovers  over  a  throne,  remained  to  be  seen.  It 
certainly  possessed  no  prestige  at  the  moment  of  its  incep- 
tion. Metternich  analyzed  the  situation  with  keenness. 
"  Louis  Philippe  finds  himself  at  his  accession  to  the  throne 
in  an  untenable  position,"  wrote  the  Austrian  Chancellor, 
"  for  the  basis  upon  which  his  authority  rests  consists  only 
of  empty  theories.  His  throne  lacks  the  weight  of  the 
plebiscite  which  was  behind  all  the  forms  of  government 
from  179^  to  1801 ;  lacks  the  tremendous  support  of  his- 


PARTIES  UNDER  LOUIS  PHILIPPE  119 

torical  right,  which  was  behind  the  Restoration ;  lacks  the 

popular   force   of   the   republic,   the    military   glory    of   the 

empire,  the  genius  and  the  arm  of  Napoleon,  the  Bourbon 

support  of  a  principle.      Its  durability  will  rest  solely  upon 

accidents." 

Its  durability,  however,  proved  greater  than  had  that  of  A  period 

the  Napoleonic  Empire  or  of  the  Restoration.   Yet  it  had  first  °^  storm 

Rnd.    stress 
to  pass  through  a  long  period  of  storm  and  stress.      It  had 

enemies  without,  who  denied  its  very  right  to  exist.  And 
even  the  supporters  of  the  new  regime  were  divided  into  two 
parties  who  could  not  long  co-operate,  so  different  were 
their  views  of  the  policies  that  ought  to  be  followed  by  the 
Government  both  at  home  and  abroad.  There  was  the 
so-called  party  of  movement  or  progress,  with  Laffitte,  a  The  pro- 
rich  Parisian  banker,  and  Lafayette,  at  its  head.  This  ^ 
party  did  not  consider  that  the  revolution  was  over  as  soon 
as  Louis  Philippe  sat  upon  a  throne.  They  wished  at 
home  to  effect  many  reforms  in  a  democratic  sense,  not 
with  revolutionary  haste  but  gradually;  and  abroad,  they 
wished  to  aid  those  peoples  which  were  revolting  against  mis- 
rule— as  in  Belgium,  Poland,  and  Italy.  Thus  by  making 
France  more  democratic  and  by  supporting  democratic 
movements  elsewhere,  France  would  resume  in  the  world  her 
position  of  leadership  in  liberalism,  which  she  had  held  under 
the  Revolution  of  1789. 

The  other  party  was   called  the  party  of  resistance,  of  The  con- 
conservatism.      It  beHeved  that  the  Revolution  of  1830  had  ^^^\^  ^^® 

party, 
terminated  on  August  9th  when  Louis  Philippe  accepted  the 

revised  constitution  and  became  king.  It  held  that  the 
Revolution  had  simply  substituted  for  a  king  who  wished 
to  overthrow  the  parliamentary  system  established  in  1814} 
a  king  who  wished  to  maintain  that  system ;  that  the  Revolu- 
tion meant  the  preservation  of  existing  institutions,  did 
not  at  all  mean  the  expansion  of  those  institutions  in  a 
democratic  direction;  that  it  was  a  popular  revolution 
designed  to  prevent  a  royal  revolution.      It  believed  that 


120 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


Popular 
unrest. 


Casimir- 
Perier  and 
the  policy 
of  the  con- 
servatives. 


France  ought  immediately  to  recover  her  normal  condition, 
that  the  revolutionary  passions  which  disturb  men's  minds 
and  injure  business  ought  to  be  quieted  at  once.  Abroad, 
as  well  as  at  home,  it  would  pursue  a  policy  of  peace. 
Casimir-Perier,  Guizot,  and  the  Duke  of  Broglie  were  leaders 
of  this  group. 

Louis  Philippe's  preferences  were  decidedly  for  the  latter 
party.  Yet  he  could  not  at  first  break  openly  with  the 
former.  For  some  time,  therefore,  he  called  members  of 
both  to  the  ministry.  Such  a  ministry  could  not  from 
the  very  nature  of  the  case  have  a  clear,  coherent  policy. 
Revolutionary  passions  still  ran  riot  in  Paris.  Crowds  de- 
manded the  execution  of  the  ministers  of  Charles  X,  who 
had  advised  the  autocratic  actions  of  that  monarch.  Mobs 
attacked  Legitimists  in  the  streets  of  Paris.  These  out- 
breaks resulted  in  business  stagnation.  The  working  classes 
suffered.  It  is  said  that  150,000  of  them  left  Paris  in 
search  of  employment.  Pubhc  credit  sank  rapidly.  The 
bonds  fell.  No  one  could  foresee  what  would  happen  either 
at  home  or  abroad.  The  bourgeoisie  felt  insecure  and  rallied 
to  the  party  of  resistance. 

Finally  March  13,  1831,  Casimir-Perier  and  the  party 
of  resistance  came  into  power.  That  party  was  destined 
to  remain  in  power,  with  some  variations,  more  or  less 
marked,  during  the  rest  of  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe.  Its 
policy  truly  expressed  the  essential  character  of  the  July 
Monarchy,  which  fell  after  eighteen  years  because  it  had  not 
accomplished  the  democratic  reforms  demanded  by  the  party 
of  progress. 

Casimir-Perier  was  a  man  of  great  wealth,  of  imperious 
temper,  of  positive  opinions,  of  incisive  speech.  The  prin- 
ciples according  to  which  he  intended  to  administer  the 
government  were  boldly  and  clearly  stated  in  an  address 
delivered  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  shortly  after  the  for- 
mation of  his  ministry.  His  declarations  formed  virtually 
the  programme  of  the  party  of  resistance.      He  announced 


THE  POLICY  OF  ORDER  121 

his  intention  to  carry  out  without  weakness  and  without 
exaggeration  the  principle  of  the  July  Revolution.  Now 
that  principle  was  not  insurrection ;  it  was  resistance  to 
executive  aggression.  "  France  was  exasperated,  she  was 
defied ;  she  defended  herself,  and  her  victory  was  the  victory 
of  law  basely  outraged.  Respect  for  plighted  faith,  respect 
for  law,  that  is  the  principle  of  the  Revolution  of  July,  the 
principle  of  the  government  founded  by  it.  For  that  Revo- 
lution founded  a  government  and  did  not  inaugurate  an- 
archy. It  did  not  overthrow  the  form  of  society,  it  affected 
only  the  political  system.  It  aimed  at  the  establishment 
of  a  government  that  should  be  free  but  orderly.  Thus 
violence  must  not  be,  either  at  home  or  abroad,  the  character 
of  our  government.  At  home  every  appeal  to  force,  abroad 
every  encouragement  of  popular  insurrection,  is  a  violation 
of  its  principle.  Such  is  the  thought,  such  the  rule  of 
our  home  and  foreign  policy.  Order  must  be  maintained, 
the  laws  must  be  executed,  authority  respected.  Public 
security  and  tranquillity  must  be  revived.  The  Revolution 
has  not  begun  for  France  the  reign  of  force.  The  blood 
of  the  French  belongs  to  France  alone.  The  first  result 
of  this  Revolution  has  been  to  render  monarchy  more  popular 
by  reconciling  it  with  liberty." 

Casimir-Perier  formulated  for  foreign  affairs  the  principle  Foreign 
of  non-intervention,  promising  not  to  intervene  in  favor  of  P°  ^°^' 
peoples  in  insurrection,  but  asserting  that  foreign  powers 
had  likewise  no  right  to  intervene  beyond  their  own  frontiers. 
This  principle  was  absolutely  opposed  to  that  on  which  the 
Holy  Alliance  had  been  acting.  Later  Casimir-Perier  did 
intervene  in  Italy  and  in  Belgium  in  the  name  of  the  principle 
of  non-intervention. 

This  policy  of  rigorous  restoration  of  order  was  begun 
at  once.  Casimir-Perier  died  in  1832  after  a  service  of 
only  fourteen  months,  but  the  policy  he  outlined  with  such 
clearness  and  firmness,  and  put  into  force,  was  continued  in 
large  measure  by  his  successors. 


122  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

Opposition  xhc  Government  needed  whatever   strength  it   could   get 

^  ■  from  a  concentration  of  all  its  forces  for  the  preservation 

of  its  existence,  for  the  parties  that  desired  the  overthrow 
of  the  Orleanist  Monarchy  were  active  and  daring.  These 
parties,  the  Legitimists  and  the  Republicans,  it  finally  suc- 
ceeded in  silencing,  though  not  until  after  much  shedding 
of  blood. 
The  For   the   Legitimists,   those   who   defended   the   rights   of 

Charles  X  and  his  descendants,  Louis  Philippe  was  a  usurper, 
a  thief  who  had  treacherously  stolen  the  crown  of  the  Duke 
of  Bordeaux,  the  legitimate  king.      This  party  was  numer- 
The  ically  small,  but  it  had  in  the  Duchess  of  Berry  a  dauntless 

Duchess  of  r^Y^^  resolute,  if  imprudent  leader.  A  woman  of  unusual 
personal  charm,  attracting  people  to  her  and  her  plans 
despite  their  better  judgment,  she  now,  an  exile  in  England, 
conceived  the  idea  of  winning  a  throne  for  her  son,  the 
Duke  of  Bordeaux.  That  the  accomplishment  of  this  would 
be  the  very  climax  of  adventure  did  not  sober  her  romantic, 
passionate  nature.  She  believed  that  foreign  monarchs 
would  aid  in  asserting  the  principle  of  legitimacy,  which 
lay  at  the  basis  of  their  own  power.  The  magic  of  Na- 
poleon's return  from  Elba  was  fresh  in  the  mind  of  Europe. 
Might  not  a  beautiful  woman,  representative  of  the  House 
of  Bourbon,  succeed  where  the  audacious  soldier  had  suc- 
ceeded.'' The  Duchess  won  the  reluctant  consent  of  Charles 
X.  She  counted  for  success  upon  the  favorable  situation 
of  the  European  powers,  upon  the  supposed  strength  of 
the  Bourbon  party  in  France,  upon  the  co-operation  of  the 
clergy  and  the  nobility,  and  upon  the  support  of  the  Vendee, 
considered  the  home  of  chivalric  devotion  to  the  white 
flag  of  the  Bourbons.  She  felt  so  sure  of  success  that 
she  had  already  prepared  a  new  constitution.  She  was 
warned  in  vain  by  prominent  Legitimists  of  the  total  lack 
of  effective  preparations  for  so  desperate  an  undertaking. 
Crossing  the  continent  from  England  to  Italy,  she  landed 
in  France  April  28,  1832,  and,  concealed  in  a  hut,  waited 


INSURRECTIONARY  MOVEMENTS  123 

for  the  proiniscd  rising  of  Marseilles.  Even  the  news  that 
this  had  failed  and  that  the  leaders  were  prisoners  did  not 
daunt  her.  She  had  told  the  faithful  to  be  ready  for  her 
in  Vendee  on  the  first  of  May.  She  must  keep  the  promise. 
Eluding  the  spies  who  were  upon  her  heels,  after  great  hard- 
ship, constant  danger,  and  numerous  adventures,  she  suc- 
ceeded in  reaching  her  destination.  But  the  Government  knew 
of  the  plan  and  the  few  hundred  defenders  of  the  legitimate 
monarchy  were  put  down  after  a  brave  resistance.  The 
Duchess  escaped,  reached  Nantes  after  great  exertions,  and 
eluded  the  police  for  several  months.  She  was  betrayed  by 
a  person  whom  she  had  employed  on  several  errands,  was 
arrested,  and  was  imprisoned  until  it  was  thought  she  was 
dishonored  and  rendered  politically  impotent  by  the  birth 
of  a  daughter  and  the  avowal  of  a  secret  marriage. 

At  the  very  time  this  royalist  insurrection  was  being  put 
down  in  the  west,  a  republican  insurrection  burst  out  in 
Paris.  Lafayette  had  won  the  acquiescence  of  the  Republi- 
cans in  the  erection  of  the  July  Monarchy,  but  only  by 
assuring  them  that  it  would  be  the  "  best  of  republics."  But 
this  did  not  prove  to  be  the  case.  By  1832  it  seemed  clear 
to  them  that  they  had  been  duped,  and  that  the  July  Mon- 
archy promised  no  growth  in  liberty  for  France.  They 
then  became  its  bitter  enemies. 

An  insurrection  broke  out  in  Paris  in  June  1832  on  the  Republican 
occasion  of  the  funeral  of  General  Lamarque,  a  prominent  ^^^^"^^" 
Republican.  It  was  not  sanctioned  by  the  prominent  men 
of  the  republican  party.  The  generals,  known  to  be  Re- 
publicans, remained  inactive.  The  insurgents,  therefore, 
were  obscure,  and  their  number  was  small,  yet  they  fought 
with  desperation  for  two  days  in  the  streets  of  the  capital. 
They  were  defeated  because  they  were  unable  to  gain  the 
co-operation  of  any  considerable  body  of  men.  The  work- 
men of  Paris  did  not  rise.  The  leaders  refused  to  lead. 
Yet  an  insurrection  so  ill-timed  and  so  ill-directed  occasioned 
considerable  loss  to  the  Government.    It  was  important  as  be- 


12-i 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


Vigorous 
measures 
of  the  Gov- 
ernment. 


ing  the  first  frankly  republican  insurrection  since  1815,  and  it 
was  the  strongest  opposition  the  Government  of  July  had 
thus  far  had  to  overcome.  The  Republicans  were  not 
discouraged  by  this  failure,  but  went  on  preparing  for  the 
future.  The  Government  favored  a  law  aimed  at  breaking 
up  the  secret  societies  which  were  spreading  republican 
principles,  by  restricting  the  right  of  association.  Hence- 
forth, any  association,  whatever  might  be  its  nature  and 
whatever  the  number  of  its  members,  must  submit  its  con- 
stitution and  by-laws  to  the  Government,  and  might  not 
exist  without  its  consent.  Hardly  had  the  new  law 
been  passed  than  new  insurrections  burst  forth  in  several 
cities.  Particularly  important  was  that  in  Lyons  in  April 
1834,  which  grew  out  of  labor  troubles  but  quickly  took  on 
a  political  character.  For  five  days  the  riot  raged  in  that 
city,  finally,  after  great  exertions,  being  put  down  by  the 
Government.  Insurrections  also  occurred  in  several  other 
cities. 

The  Government  was  successful  in  suppressing  these  re- 
publican upheavals.  It  made  no  attempt  to  conciliate  the 
discontented.  It  did  not  study  the  labor  problem,  which 
was  one  of  the  causes  of  the  prevalent  unrest,  but  deter- 
mined to  crush  this  annoying  faction  once  for  all.  Repub- 
licanism must  be  stamped  out.  To  this  end  the  press  must 
be  controlled.  The  revised  Charter  of  1830  had  provided 
for  freedom  of  the  press,  and  had  declared  the  censorship 
abolished  forever;  yet  the  July  Monarchy  from  the  very  mo- 
ment of  its  inception  had  vigorously  prosecuted  republican 
journals,  instinctively  recognizing  in  them  its  most  danger- 
ous enemy.  From  July  1830  to  September  1834  it  had  in- 
stituted over  five  hundred  trials  of  journalists  alone,  had 
imposed  heavy  fines  and  long  terms  of  imprisonment  upon 
editors.  The  Tribune,  the  most  aggressive  republican  sheet, 
had  been  prosecuted  111  times  and  had  been  forced  to  pay 
157,000  francs  in  fines.  Such  prosecutions  were  more  fre- 
quent than  ever  after  the  futile  insurrections  of  April  1834. 


ATTACKS  UPON  LOUIS  PHILIPPE  125 

In  addition  to  press  prosecutions  the  Government  deter-  The  prose- 
mined  to  prosecute  some  of  those  who  had  been  arrested  in  cution  of 
the  recent  riots.  It  instituted  a  monster  trial  of  164  ac- 
cused, not  before  the  jury  courts,  distrustful  of  the  results 
in  that  case,  but  before  the  Chamber  of  Peers.  Over  four 
thousand  witnesses  were  called.  The  defendants  refused  to 
recognize  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Peers  or  to  defend  them- 
selves. The  case  dragged  on  for  months,  from  March  1835 
to  January  1836,  creating  much  bitterness  of  feeling.  Fi- 
nally the  accused  were  condemned  to  various  terms  of  im- 
prisonment or  to  deportation.  But  the  decision  was  not 
enforced.  A  general  amnesty,  proclaimed  a  little  later  on 
the  occasion  of  the  marriage  of  the  King's  eldest  son,  liber- 
ated them.  By  these  vigorous  methods,  however,  the  repub- 
lican party  was  effectually  silenced  for  many  years.  Its  im- 
potence was  increased  still  further  by  divisions  among  the 
members  themselves. 

Not  only  were  attacks  made  upon  the  Government  during  Attempts 
these  stormy  years,  but  attempts  upon  the  life  of  the  King  ^.P°"      ® 
were    frequent.       These   were    ascribed   to    the   Republicans  lo^jg 
and  served  to  discredit  them  still  further.    They  were  not  the  Philippe, 
acts  of  the  party  but  of  isolated  individuals.      From  1835 
to  18'16  six  different  attempts  to  assassinate   the   monarch 
were  made  and  numerous  other  plots  were  discovered  before 
they   could  be  put   into   operation.       The  most  horrible   of 
these  was  that   of  Fieschi   in    1835.      An   infernal  machine 
composed  of  many  gun-barrels  was  discharged  by  a  Corsican, 
Fieschi,  at  the  King  as  he  was  passing  with  his  three  sons 
and   many   members    of   the    court    and    army   through    the 
streets  of  Paris,  July  28,   1835.       Eighteen   persons  were 
killed  on  the  spot,  many  more  were  injured.     The  King  and 
his  sons  escaped  as  by  a  miracle. 

The  Government,  encouraged  by  the  widespread  execration  The  Sep- 
of  this  fiendish  crime,  determined  to  strike  hard  at  all  op-  *6™^" 
ponents.       It    secured   the    passage    in    September    1835    of 
new   laws    concerning   the    assize    courts,    the   jury    system, 


126  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

and  the  press.  The  Minister  of  Justice  was  empowered  to 
estabhsh  as  many  of  these  assize  or  special  courts  as  might 
be  necessary  to  judge  summarily  all  those  attacking  the 
security  of  the  state.  The  accused  might  be  judged  even 
though  absent.  In  jury  trials  the  decision  might  hence- 
forth be  given  by  a  mere  majority,  seven,  instead  of  the  two- 
thirds  vote,  eight,  previously  required.  The  third  and  most 
The  press  important  law  concerned  the  press.  It  was  designed  to  pro- 
1^^'  tect  the  king,  the  constitution,  and  the  fundamental  prin- 

ciples of  society  from  attack.  Heavy  fines,  as  high  as 
50,000  francs,  were  imposed  for  various  offenses — for  a 
summons  to  insurrection,  even  if  the  insurrection  should  not 
occur;  for  attacks  upon  the  King,  even  allusions  to  his  per- 
son, or  caricatures;  for  publication  of  jury  lists;  for  the 
collection  of  subscriptions  to  aid  newspapers  to  pay  their 
fines.  The  law  went  even  further  and  forbade  Frenchmen 
under  heavy  fines  the  right  to  defend  other  forms  of  govern- 
ment than  the  existing  one,  to  declare  themselves  adherents 
of  any  fallen  royal  house;  to  question  the  principle  of 
private  property.  The  censorship  was  re-established  for 
drawings,  caricatures,  and  plays.  The  preliminary  deposit 
required  of  papers  was  raised  to  100,000  francs. 

These  September  laws  gave  great  offense  to  all  liberal 
and  moderate  men.  After  five  years  of  freedom  of  the 
press  to  return  to  so  far-reaching  a  suppression  of  that 
freedom  seemed  unjustifiable.  The  most  careful  defense 
of  the  King  and  the  constitution  was  certainly  desirable, 
but  did  it  require  any  such  drastic  measures  at  this  time? 
Would  not  the  very  multiplicity  of  crimes  tend  to  encourage 
crime? 

These  laws  greatly  weakened  the  July  Monarchy.  Men 
felt  that  individual  liberty  was  only  an  empty  word.  The 
press  law  was  aimed  particularly  at  the  Legitimists  and 
the  Republicans.  The  papers  of  the  former  party,  well 
supplied  with  capital,  survived  the  persecution  to  which 
they  were  now  subjected.      The  republican  organs,  lacking 


THE  REVIVAL  OF  BONAPARTISM  127 

this  resource,  largely  disappeared.  The  press  in  France 
was  in  as  deplorable  a  condition  as  in  the  worst  days  of  the 
Restoration. 

The  Government  might  now  feel  secure  against  the  at-  The  Bona- 
tempts  of  the  Legitimists  and  the  Republicans.      The  only  P*"^sts. 
other  party  that  was  an  inevitable  opponent  of  the  July 
Monarchy  was  the  Bonapartist.      But  of  this  Louis  Philippe 
entertained  no  fear.      Indeed,  with  what  proved  to  be  singu- 
lar fatuity,  he  distinctly  promoted  by  his  actions  the  growth 
of  a  sentiment  that  in  the  end  was  to  prove  very  costly  both 
to  himself  and  to  France.      With  the  evident  intention  of 
showing  that  the  July  Monarchy,  unlike  that  of  the  Restora- 
tion, was  truly  national,  that  it  had  no  desire  to  eliminate 
all   reminders   of  the  Napoleonic  era,   but   rather  regarded 
them  as  among  the  priceless  glories  of  France,  he  completed 
the  Arc   de  Triomphe,  begun   by   Napoleon,  named   streets 
and  bridges  after  Napoleon's  battles,  and  caused  the  Na-  I-ouis 
poleonic  history  to  be  portrayed  on  the  walls  of  the  palace  at       ,  .. 
Versailles,  side  by  side  with  that  of  Louis  XIV.     Literature  Napoleonic 
was  already  busy  creating  the  Napoleonic  legend,  which,  ig-  legend, 
noring  the  evils  and  the  frightful  cost  to  France  of  the  great 
Emperor's    rule,    was    immortalizing   his    achievements    and 
mourning  his  tragic  end.      It  was  singular  policy,  indeed, 
for  a  descendant  of  Capetian  kings  to  foster  the  reviving 
interest  in  the  career  of  the  illustrious  founder  of  a   rival 
family.      But  that  no  danger  lay  that  way  seemed  to  be 
proved  by  two   attempts   on   the  part  of  the   heir  to  the 
Napoleonic  throne  to  overthrow  the  July  Monarchy,  which 
was  showing  itself  so  complaisant  to  the  Napoleonic   senti- 
ment, attempts  which  resulted  in  ridiculous  failures. 

Napoleon  I  had  died  in  1821,  and  his  son,  the  King  of  louis 

Rome,  known   after   1818   as   the  Duke  of  Reichstadt,   had  Napoleon 

Bonaparte, 
died  in  1832.      The  headship  of  the  family  thus  passed  to  i808-1873. 

Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  the  son  of  Louis  Napoleon,  for- 
merly King  of  Holland,  and  of  Hortense  Beauharnais, 
daughter  of  the  Empress  Josephine.    Napoleon  had  indicated 


128  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

that  the  succession  should  be  in  this  hne  in  case  he  should 
leave  no  direct  descendant.  Prince  Louis,  born  in  the  Tuile- 
ries  in  1808,  had  been  educated  in  Germany,  and  had  gone  to 
Italy,  where,  in  1831,  he  had  participated  on  the  popular  side 
in  the  revolutionary  movements  described  above.  He  was  now 
living  in  Switzerland,  brooding  over  his  fortune,  taking  seri- 
ously his  role  of  pretender,  publishing  his  political  views. 
Suddenly  he  appeared  before  the  garrison  of  the  fortress  of 
Strassburg  in  1836,  wearing  the  familiar  Napoleonic  coat 
and  hoping  to  win  the  support  of  the  soldiers  by  the  very 
magic  of  his  name.  Thus  having  a  lever  he  could  perhaps 
topple  Louis  Philippe  from  his  throne.  He  failed  miserably, 
and  was  brought  to  Paris  a  prisoner.  The  Government, 
thinking  it  wise  to  treat  this  episode  as  a  childish  folly,  did 
not  prosecute  him  but  allowed  him  to  sail  to  the  United  States. 
But  Louis  returned  next  year  to  Switzerland.  He  removed 
to  England  upon  the  threat  of  Louis  Philippe,  taking  part 
there  in  fashionable  or  semi-fashionable  life,  elaborating  his 
political  theories  and  planning  for  his  political  future.  His 
undertaking  had  failed  but  he  had  at  least  announced 
himself  to  France  as  the  heir  of  the  Great  Napoleon. 
He  believed  firmly  in  his  star  and  felt  that  he  would 
some  day  be  called  to  finish  the  interrupted  work  of  his 
uncle. 
The  second  The  Government  of  Louis  Philippe  proceeded  to  inject 
still  further  vitality  into  the  growing  Napoleonic  legend.  It 
secured  the  consent  of  the  English  Goverment  to  the  removal 
of  the  remains  of  Napoleon  from  St.  Helena  to  Paris,  where 
they  might  repose  according  to  the  wish  which  the  Emperor 
had  himself  expressed  in  his  last  testament,  on  the  banks 
of  the  Seine,  "  in  the  midst  of  the  French  people  whom  I 
have  loved  so  well,"  and  in  December  1840  they  were  de- 
posited beneath  the  dome  of  the  Invalides  with  elaborate 
funeral  pomp  and  amidst  evidences  of  extraordinary  popular 
excitement.  A  minister  of  Louis  Philippe  said  in  the  Cham- 
ber of  Deputies,  "  He  was  Emperor  and  King,  the  legitimate 


funeral    of 
Napoleon    I 


THE  BOULOGNE  FIASCO  129 

sovereign  of  this  land;  as  such  he  might  rest  in  St.  Denis. 

But  he  is  entitled  to  more  than  the  usual  burial  place  of 

kings."       The   question    put    by    Lamartine    was    pertinent. 

What  was  the  Government  thinking  of  "  to  allow  the  French 

heart  and  imagination  to  be  so  fired.''  " 

Meanwhile,  Louis  Bonaparte,  pretender  to  the  throne,  had  The 

resolved  to  take  advantaa-e  of  this  renewed  interest  in  Na-     °^  °^^^ 

^  fiasco, 

poleon.       Declaring  that  the  ashes  of  the  Emperor  ought 

to  rest  only  in  an  Imperial  France,  he  made  another  attempt 
to  overturn  the  Government  of  Louis  Philippe.  On  August 
6,  1840,  he  landed  with  about  sixty  companions  near  Bou- 
logne, hoping  to  win  over  the  garrison  of  that  town  and 
then  to  enact  another  "  return  from  Elba,"  an  event  whose 
fascination  for  adventurers  was  lively,  but  an  achievement 
difficult  to  repeat.  He  brought  with  him  proclamations 
declaring  the  House  of  Orleans  dethroned.  The  failure  of 
this  attempt  was  more  humiliating  than  that  of  Strassburg, 
four  years  earlier.  The  little  group  was  scattered  by  the 
appearance  of  troops.  They  fled  toward  the  beach,  where 
most  of  them  surrendered.  But  a  few,  among  them  the 
Prince,  plunged  into  the  water  in  order  to  get  to  a  boat 
nearby,  which  capsized  as  they  were  attempting  to  scramble 
into  it.  They  were  seized  by  the  authorities.  But  the 
Prince,  brought  before  the  Chamber  of  Peers  for  trial,  had 
a  chance  to  make  a  speech.  "  For  the  first  time  in  my 
life,"  he  said,  "  I  am  at  last  able  to  make  my  voice  heard 
in  France  and  to  speak  freely  to  Frenchmen.  .  .  .  The 
cruel  and  undeserved  proscription  which  for  twenty-five  years 
has  dragged  my  life  from  the  steps  of  a  throne  to  the 
prison  which  I  have  just  left  has  not  been  able  to  impair 
the  courage  of  my  heart.  ...  I  represent  before  you  a 
principle,  a  cause,  a  defeat.  The  principle  is  the  sovereignty 
of  the  people:  the  cause  is  that  of  the  Empire:  the  defeat 
is  Waterloo."  His  eloquence,  however,  was  unavailing.  He 
was  condemned  to  imprisonment  for  life  in  the  fortress  of 
Ham.      He  escaped,  however,  six  years  later  disguised  as 


130 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


Ministerial 
instability. 


Rivalry  of 
Thiers  and 
Guizot. 


Louis 
Philippe 
intends   to 
lule. 


a  mason.  Two  years  after  that  he  was  the  most  important 
figure  in  France. 

The  parliamentary  history  of  France  during  the  ten  years 
from  1830  to  1840  was  marked  by  instabihty.  There  were 
ten  ministries  within  ten  years.  Yet  there  was  a  fairly  con- 
tinuous policy.  Ministries  might  disappear  and  new  ones 
come  on  the  scene,  but  all  after  the  fall  of  Laffitte,  1831, 
were  composed  of  men  of  the  party  of  resistance,  such  as 
Casimir-Perier,  Broglie,  Thiers,  and  Guizot.  The  chief  work 
was  to  consolidate  the  July  Monarchy,  to  put  do^vn  its  ene- 
mies, and  to  keep  the  peace  with  foreign  countries.  When, 
however,  the  members  of  this  party  had  finally  triumphed 
over  their  adversaries,  they  divided  against  each  other.  The 
personal  rivalry  of  two  men,  Thiers  and  Guizot,  was  largely 
the  cause  of  this.  Each  desired  the  leading  place  in  the 
Government,  Out  of  this  rivalry  arose  two  parties,  one  called 
the  Left  Center,  with  Thiers  as  leader,  the  other  called  the 
Right  Center,  under  Guizot.  The  division,  however,  was 
not  based  simply  upon  the  personal  ambitions  of  the  two 
men.  Each  had  its  theory  of  the  constitution.  Thiers 
held  that  the  king  reigns  but  does  not  govern ;  in  other 
words,  the  king  must  always  choose  his  ministers  from  the 
party  that  is  in  the  majority  in  the  Chamber  and  must 
then  let  them  govern  without  intervening  personally  in 
affairs.  Guizot,  on  the  other  hand,  held  that  the  king 
should  have  the  greatest  consideration  for  the  opinions  of 
the  majority  but  that  he  was  not  bound  strictly  to  follow 
that  majority.  "  The  throne,"  he  said,  "  is  not  an  empty 
chair." 

Louis  Philippe  had  no  desire  to  be  simply  an  ornamental 
head  of  the  state,  as  he  was  according  to  Thiers'  view.  He 
desired  to  be  the  real  ruler,  to  govern  as  well  as  to  reign. 
He  insisted  upon  conducting  foreign  affairs  himself,  and  he 
endeavored  to  exercise  a  controlling  influence  in  other  ways 
through  his  ministers.  But  for  several  years  after  his 
accession  to  the  throne  he  was  careful  to  guard  himself  from 


LOUIS  PHILIPPE  AND  THIERS  131 

all  appearance  of  assuming  personal  power.  But  now  that 
his  enemies  were  overthrown  and  crushed,  now  that  these 
street  insurrections  were  stamped  out,  he  began  to  reveal 
his  real  purpose  more  clearly,  which  was  to  be  ruler  in  fact 
as  well  as  in  theory.  Taking  advantage  of  the  party  divi- 
sions just  alluded  to  he  forced  Thiers,  the  chief  minister 
and  a  man  too  independent  to  be  a  mere  spokesman  of  the 
King,  to  resign  in  1836,  and  called  to  the  ministry  Mole, 
a  man  who,  as  he  correctly  supposed,  would,  because  of  his 
political  convictions,  be  very  willing  to  be  the  representative 
of  the  King's  personal  views.  Men  began  at  once  to  talk 
of  "  personal  government,"  of  the  interference  of  the  mon-  Personal 
arch  in  the  realm  that  properly,  they  held,  belonged  to  &<>'^^^"" 
parliament.  References  to  Charles  X  became  frequent.  A 
vigorous  opposition  to  this  "  court  policy  "  and  "  court  min- 
istry "  finally  brought  about  its  fall  in  1839.  Thereupon 
Soult  became  chief  minister,  but  was  looked  upon  as  as  much 
the  representative  of  the  King  as  Mole  had  been.  His  brief 
ministry  was  notable  for  a  direct  rebuff  administered  through 
him  to  the  monarch.  Louis  Philippe  asked  for  an  appro- 
priation for  his  son,  the  Duke  of  Nemours.  The  Chamber 
rejected  the  request  by  a  vote  of  226  to  220.  The  Soult 
ministry  then  retired  and  at  last  the  King,  appearing  to 
renounce  his  personal  ambition,  called  Thiers  to  the  ministry. 

The   chief  feature  of  the  short   Thiers   ministry  was  its  Thiers  and 

treatment  of  the  Eastern  Question,  which  in   a  new  phase  Eastern 

Question, 
had  been  for  several  years  before  Europe  again.  The  exist- 
ence of  the  Turkish  Empire  was  once  more  threatened,  this 
time  by  a  powerful  vassal  of  the  Sultan.  After  the  Greek 
war  of  independence,  in  which  the  viceroy  of  Egypt,  Me- 
hemet  Ali,  had  greatly  aided  the  Sultan,  the  former  was  dis- 
satisfied with  his  reward.  He  began  to  extend  his  possessions 
by  arms.  He  conquered  all  of  Syria  (1832).  He  pushed  for- 
ward into  Asia  Minor,  defeating  the  Turkish  generals  sent 
against  him.  He  prepared  to  go  still  further,  to  Constanti- 
nople.    At  once  the  European  powers  began  to  take  sides. 


132 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


Resigna- 
tion of 
Thiers. 


Russia  offered  her  aid  and  succeeded  in  making  a  treaty  with 
the  frightened  Sultan,  the  treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi,  1833, 
whereby,  for  certain  obHgations  she  was  to  assume,  she 
acquired  an  almost  complete  control  of  the  Turkish  govern- 
ment. England,  hostile  as  ever  to  Russian  influence  in 
Turkey  and  also  wishing  to  maintain  her  own  commercial 
prestige  in  the  East,  came  to  the  aid  of  Turkey.  Russia 
and  England,  therefore,  declared  their  intention  of  maintain- 
ing the  integrity  of  the  Sultan's  dominions,  though  their  mo- 
tives were  contradictory.  Prussia  and  Austria  took  the  same 
side,  asserting  that  the  rights  of  legitimate  monarchs  must 
be  maintained.  On  the  other  hand,  France  supported  Me- 
hemet  Ali.  The  French  had  been  attracted  toward  Egypt 
ever  since  Napoleon's  expedition.  The  Egyptian  army  was 
organized  and  drilled  by  Frenchmen.  France  had  just 
conquered  Algiers.  A  close  connection  between  Mehemet 
Ali  and  France  would  probably  offer  considerable  commer- 
cial and  political  advantage  in  the  Mediterranean.  Thus 
France  became  the  patron  of  Mehemet.  But  she  stood 
alone.  Her  isolation  was  shown  to  all  the  world  when  the 
powers  met  in  conference  in  London  in  1840  and,  ignoring 
her,  because  they  kne^v  that  she  was  hostile,  made  a  treaty 
with  Turkey,  pledging  themselves  to  force  Mehemet  Ali  to 
terms.  The  publication  of  this  treaty  aroused  a  warlike  feel- 
ing in  France,  as  it  seemed  to  exclude  her  from  the  concert  of 
powers,  as  in  1815.  Thiers  urged  the  adoption  of  warlike 
measures,  but  the  King  vigorously  opposed  such  proposals, 
which  would  involve  France  and  the  July  Monarchy  in  the 
greatest  danger.  Thiers  resigned  and  Guizot  now  became 
chief  minister.  France  adopted  a  policy  of  peace  and  the 
danger  of  a  war  passed.  Thus  the  King  rather  than  the 
ministry  had  determined  the  policy  of  the  Government.  In- 
cidentally, Louis  Philippe  found  himself  relieved  of  the  min- 
ister who  believed  that  the  king  should  reign  but  should 
not  govern,  and  he  gained  in  Guizot,  who  now  became  the 
leading   minister   and   who   remained   in   power   until    184<8, 


THE  GUIZOT  MINISTRY  133 

an  instrument  through  which  he  was  enabled  to  carry  out 
with  great  skill  his  personal  poUcy  during  the  remainder 
of  his  reign. 

With  the  elevation  of  Guizot  to  the  leading  position  in  Guizot, 
the  Government,  France  attained  ministerial  stability.  The  1787-1874. 
administration  of  which  he  was  the  head  remained  in  power 
from  1840  to  1848.  Guizot  was  now  fifty-three  years  of 
age.  He  had  been  a  Liberal  at  the  time  of  the  Empire  and 
the  Restoration.  Eminent  as  a  professor,  an  historian,  and 
an  orator,  he  was  a  man  of  strong  and  rigid  mind,  holding 
certain  political  principles  with  the  tenacity  of  a  mathema- 
tician.     In  a  world  of  change  he  remained  immutable.      He  Guizot's 

refused    to    recognize    that   France   needed   any    alteration  ^°  ^  \°^ 

.....  .  .  principles. 

in  her  political  institutions.      He  believed  in  the  Charter  of 

1814  as  revised  in  1830.  Any  further  reform  was  un- 
necessary and  would  be  dangerous.  To  preserve  order 
within  and  peace  without,  that  the  wealth  of  France  might 
increase,  was  his  programme.  His  policy  was,  as  he  said 
in  his  opening  speech  in  the  Chamber,  the  *'  maintenance 
of  peace  everywhere  and  always." 

These  were  also  the  views  of  Louis  Philippe.  The  King 
could  in  no  sense  use  Guizot  as  a  pliant  tool.  Guizot 
was  a  man  of  far  too  great  independence  of  thought,  of 
far  too  vigorous  and  original  character,  to  be  the  tool  of 
any  man.  But  this  harmony  of  opinions  was  so  complete 
that  the  King  could  complacently  watch  his  minister  carry 
out  the  royal  programme,  and  Louis  Philippe  was  always 
far  more  concerned  with  the  reality  than  with  the  appear- 
ance of  power. 

Moreover,  the  Government  was  scrupulous  in  its  adherence  The  Govern- 
to  parliamentary  forms,  in  which  Guizot  was   a  strict  be-  ^^^^  ^°^^" 

pulously 
liever.      This  ministry  always  had  a  majority  in  the  Cham-  pariia- 

ber  of  Deputies.      That  majority,  indeed,  increased  at  each  mentary. 
election.      There  was  no  attempt  to  defy  the  Chamber  and 
exalt  the  royal  prerogative.     The  King  could  not  be  accused 
of  aspiring  to  play  a  personal  role  as  in  the  days  of  Mole, 


134< 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


How  the 
Govern- 
ment ob- 
tained its 
majorities. 


The  ma- 
nipulation 
of  the 
voters. 


for  the  ministry  directed  the  Government  and  the  ministry 
constantly  had  a  majority  of  the  Deputies  to  approve  its  ac- 
tions. What  France  witnessed  was  a  policy  of  stiff  con- 
servatism, or  immobility,  constantly  supported  by  the 
Chamber. 

The  attention  of  the  country  consequently  became  riveted 
on  that  majority.  How  was  it  obtained?  It  was  clear 
that  it  did  not  represent  public  opinion,  did  not  at  all 
express  the  convictions  of  France  as  a  whole.  It  became 
evident  on  examination  that  that  majority,  the  never  failing 
support  of  the  ministry,  was  obtained  by  an  elaborate  system 
of  corruption.  Louis  Philippe  and  Guizot  took  no  account 
of  public  opinion.  They  fixed  their  attention  solely  upon 
what  was  called  the  pays  legal,  that  is,  upon  the  body  which 
possessed  political  rights  under  the  constitution,  namely,  the 
voters  and  the  deputies  whom  the  voters  chose.  Now  the 
number  of  voters  was  about  200,000,  the  number  of  deputies 
430.  Bodies  so  small  could  be  manipulated  and  the  manip- 
ulation was  the  supreme  task  of  Guizot,  the  very  founda- 
tion of  his  system.  It  was  accomplished  without  difficulty. 
France  was  a  liighly  centralized  state,  with  local  govern- 
ment largely  controlled  by  the  central  power.  Consequently, 
the  ministry  had  at  its  disposal  an  immense  number  of 
offices  and  it  could  do  numberless  favors  to  individuals  and 
to  communities.  The  electoral  colleges,  which  chose  the 
deputies,  were  small  bodies  frequently  consisting  of  not 
more  than  two  hundred  members,  many  of  whom  were  office- 
holders. Tlie  office-holders  did  as  they  were  told  by  the 
Grovernment,  and  other  members  were  bribed  in  various 
ways  by  appeals  to  their  self-interest.  If  they  elected  the 
candidate  desired  by  the  minister  they  might  be  rewarded 
by  seeing  a  railway  built  in  their  district,  for  this  was  the 
period  of  railway  building;  or  they  might  obtain  tobacco 
licenses  or  university  scholarships  or  petty  offices  for  their 
friends.  Many  were  the  attractions  held  out  to  the  self- 
interest  of  the  voters,  the  pays  legal.      This   was  plainly 


THE  DEMAND  FOR  REFORM  135 

corruption  of  the  electorate,  but  it  worked  well  in  the  opinion 

of  the  ministry.       It   insured  the  election   to   the   Chamber 

of   a   large   number   of   deputies    pleasing   to    the    ministry. 

Within  the  Chamber  the  same  methods  were  used.      About 

two   hundred   deputies,   nearly   half   the   assembly,   were    at  The  ma- 

the    same  time   office-holders.       The   Government   controlled  "i^^  ^  ^'^^ 

of  the 
them,  as  all  promotions  or  increases  of  salary  were  dependent  deputies. 

upon  its  favor.  The  ministry  only  needed  to  gain  a  few 
more  votes  to  have  a  majority,  and  this  was  easily  accom- 
plished by  a  tactful  distribution  of  its  favors  among  those 
who  had  an  eye  to  the  main  chance.  There  were  plums 
enough  for  the  purpose,  offices  to  be  bestowed,  railroad 
franchises  to  be  granted,  lucrative  contracts  for  government 
supplies  to  be  awarded.  "What  is  the  Chamber?"  said  a 
deputy  in  1841.  "  A  great  bazaar,  w'here  every  one  barters 
his  conscience,  or  what  passes  for  his  conscience,  in  exchange 
for  a  place  or  an  office." 

Such  a  system  was  a  mockery.  The  forms  of  the  con-  The 
stitution  were  observed  but  its  spirit  was  nullified.  Self-  servility  of 
interest  was  exalted  above  the  interests  of  the  nation.  The 
ministry  commanded  a  servile  parliament.  It  is  one  of  the 
ironies  of  history  that  Guizot,  a  man  of  most  scrupulous 
honesty  in  private  life,  should  have  been  the  master  mecha- 
nician of  so  corrupt  and  demoralizing  a  political  machine. 

Opposition  to  this  system  was,  of  course,  inevitable,  and 
is  the  main  feature  of  the  domestic  politics  of  France  from 
1841    to    1848,   when   Louis   Philippe    and   Guizot    and   the 
entire    regime    were    violently    overthrown.       Reformers    de- 
manded that  there  be  a   change  in  the  composition  of  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies  and  in  the  manner  of  electing  it,  par- 
liamentary reform  and  electoral  reform.       Electoral  reform  Demand   for 
should   be   effected   by    increasing   the    body    of   voters,   by  ^  ^^  °^^ 
lowering  the  property  qualification,   and  by  adding  certain  namentary 
classes   which   could   safely  be   intrusted   with   the    suffrage,  reform, 
even  if  they  could  not  meet  the  property  qualification.     Thus 
with  an  increased  body  of  voters  corruption  would  be  more 


136 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


ministry. 


difficult.  The  ministry  absolutely  refused  to  consider  this 
proposition.  According  to  Guizot  there  were  voters  enough ; 
moreover,  the  number  was  increasing  with  the  increase  of 
wealth.  He  even  rejected  a  proposition  that  would  have 
added  only  fifteen  thousand  voters  to  the  existing  electorate. 
Rigid   oppo-  It   was   demanded   that   the   reform    of   the    Chamber   itself 

SI  ion  0         should    be    effected    by    forbidding    deputies    to    hold    office. 

the  Guizot  .  .  -^  .   .  . 

Against  this  also  the  mmistry  set  itself.  Both  plans,  there- 
fore, were  rejected  and  the  policy  of  immobility  complacently 
continued.  Year  after  year  the  two  demands  were  brought 
forward  in  the  Chamber;  year  after  year  they  were  voted 
down  by  the  pliant  majority.  Reformers  appeared  to  be 
hopelessly  checkmated  by  the  smooth  operation  of  the  machine 
they  were  denouncing.  Well  might  Lamartine  exclaim  to 
Guizot,  "  According  to  you,  the  genius  of  the  politician 
consists  of  only  one  thing — placing  yourself  in  a  position 
created  by  chance  or  by  a  revolution,  and  there  remaining 
immobile,  inert,  implacable  to  all  improvement.  If  in  truth 
that  were  all  the  merit  of  a  statesman  directing  a  govern- 
ment, there  would  be  no  more  need  of  statesmen:  a  post 
would  do  as  well."  This  inertia  ultimately  disgusted  some 
of  the  conservatives  themselves.  One  of  the  members  who 
had  hitherto  followed  the  ministry,  summing  up  its  work  in 
1847,  said,  "  What  have  they  done  for  the  past  seven  years.? 
nothing,  nothing,  nothing."  "  France  is  bored,"  said  La- 
martine. 

Yet  this  July  Monarchy  with  its  negative  policy  of  resist- 
ance in  season  and  out  of  season,  resistance  to  lawlessness 
in  the  streets,  to  attacks  of  Legitimists  and  Republicans, 
to  demands  for  an  active  foreign  policy  favorable  to  liberty, 
to  demands  for  constitutional  reform  at  home,  was  living 
in  a  world  fermenting  with  ideas,  apparently  oblivious  of 
the  fact.  Not  only  did  its  policy  alienate  many  former 
supporters  by  its  rigid  and  peremptory  refusal  of  all  con- 
cessions, and  augment  and  sharpen  more  and  more  the  an- 
tagonism of  the  Republicans,  but  its  complete  indifference 


Hise  of 
radicalism. 


ECONOMIC  PROBLEMS  137 

to  a  new  set  of  demands  in  the  economic  sphere,  demands 
for  social  reform,  was  creating  bitter  enmities  in  another 
quarter  and  preparing  a  troublous  future.  There  was 
growing  up  in  France  a  party  more  radical  than  the  re- 
publican, a  party  that  looked  forward  not  only  to  a  change 
in  the  political  form  of  the  government  but  to  a  sweeping 
alteration  in  the  form  of  society,  in  the  relation  of  the  great 
mass  of  the  population  who  were  wage-earners  to  the  privi- 
leged few,  the  capitalists  and  employers.  The  July  Mon- 
archy was  a  government  of  the  bourgeoisie,  of  the  well-to-do, 
of  the  capitalists.  They  alone  possessed  the  suffrage.  Con- 
sequently, the  remainder  of  the  population  was  in  a  political 
sense  of  no  importance.  The  legislation  enacted  during 
these  eighteen  years  was  class  legislation,  which  favored 
the  bourgeoisie  and  which  made  no  attempt  to  meet  the 
needs  of  the  masses.  Yet  the  distress  of  the  masses  was  wide-  Economic 
spread  and  deep  and  should  have  appeared  clear  and  ominous 
to  the  Government.  Under  the  Restoration,  but  chiefly 
under  Louis  Philippe,  France  was  passing  from  the  old  in- 
dustrial system  of  small  domestic  manufacture  to  the  new 
factory  system,  the  application  of  machinery  to  industry  on  Introduc- 
a  large  scale,  the  employment  of  the  new  motive  force,  steam.  ^°^  °  ® 
This  transition  was  in  every  country  painful,  involving  as  gygteni, 
it  did  a  dislocation  and  clumsy  maladjustment  of  forces, 
and  giving  rise  to  most  vexatious  labor  questions.  Capi- 
talists who  could  give  or  withhold  the  chance  of  employ- 
ment had  the  upper  hand  and  knew  it.  Grossly  excessive 
hours  of  labor  were  required,  and  women  and  children  who 
could  tend  machines  were  sacrificed  to  the  new  system  in 
a  manner  that  had  never  been  possible  under  the  old.  The 
strange  new  conditions,  the  manifest  evils  dangerous  to 
mind  and  body,  required  new  laws  for  the  protection  of 
the  weaker  class.  But  legislation  lagged  far  behind.  Em-  Condition 
ployers  were  intent  on  exploiting  their  factories,  their  ma-  °  ,^ 
chines,  their  workmen  to  the  fullest  possible  extent,  and  classes, 
many  were  amassing  large   fortunes.       They   were  not  in- 


138  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

terested  in  lessening  the  misery  which  the  new  order  pro- 
visionally   caused.       And    the    law    of    France    forbade    the 
workmen  themselves  to   combine  for  purposes  of  improving 
their  condition.       Ignorant,  poor,  lacking  leadership,  with- 
out political  power,  smarting  under  a  sense  of  oppression 
and  injustice,  they  were  the  inevitable  enemies  of  a  regime 
that  passed  them  by,  giving  them  no  heed.      In   1831   the 
silk-weavers  of  Lyons,  earning  the  pitiful  wage  of  eighteen 
sous  a  day  for  a  day  of  eighteen  hours,  had  risen  in  in- 
surrection under  the  despairing  banner,  "  We  will  live  by 
working  or  die  fighting." 
Growth    of        Such   conditions    provoked    discussion    and   many   writers 
socialism.      began  to  preach  new  doctrines  concerning  the  organization 
of   industry    and   the    crucial   question   of    the   relations    bf 
capital  and  labor,  doctrines  henceforth  called  socialistic,  and 
appealing  with  increasing  force  to  tlie  millions  of  laborers 
who  believed  that  society  weighed  with  unjustifiable  severity 
upon  them,  that  their  labor  did  not  by  any  means  receive 
its  proportionate  reward.      St.   Simon  was  the  first  to  an- 
nounce a  socialistic  scheme  for  the  reorganization  of  society 
in   the  interest  of  the  most  numerous   class.       He  believed 
that  the  state  should  own  the  means  of  production  and  should 
organize  industry  on  the  principle  of  "  Labor  according  to 
capacity    and   reward   according   to   services."       St.    Simon 
was  a  speculative  thinker,  not  a  practical  man  of  affairs. 
His  doctrine  gained  in  direct  importance  when  it  was  adopted 
by  a  man  who  was   a  politician,  able  to   recruit   and  lead 
a  party,  and  to  make  a  programme  definite  enough  to  appeal 
louis  Blanc,  to   the   manses.       Such   a   man   was   Louis   Blanc,   who   was 
1811-1882.      destined  to  play  a  great  part  in  the  overthrow  of  the  July 
Monarchy    and    in    the    Republic    that    succeeded.       In    his 
writings  he  tried  to  convince  the  laborers  of  France  of  the 
evils  of  the   prevailing   economic   conditions,    a   task   which 
was   not   diflScult.       He   denounced   in    vehement    terms    the 
government  of  the  bourgeoisie  as  government  of  the  rich, 
by  the  rich,  and  for  the  rich.     It  must  be  swept  away  and 


THE  RISE  OF  SOCIALISM  139 

the  state  must  be  organized  on  a  thoroughly  democratic 
basis.  This  was  the  condition  precedent  to  all  success. 
Only  then  and  with  the  full  power  of  the  state  at  their 
disposal  could  the  laboring  classes  work  out  their  own  sal- 
vation. The  state,  organized  as  a  democratic  republic, 
should  then  create  so-called  national  or  social  workshops, 
advancing  the  necessary  capital.  These  would  be  con- 
trolled by  the  workers  who  would  share  the  proceeds.  They 
would  gradually  supersede  the  existing  workshops  or  fac- 
tories, controlled  and  directed  by  the  private  individuals 
who  had  supplied  the  capital  and  who  appropriated  the 
profits.  Private  competition  would  give  way  to  co-operative 
production.  The  individual  producers  would  disappear. 
Louis  Blanc's  theories,  propounded  in  a  style  at  once  clear 
and  vivid,  were  largely  adopted  by  workingmen.  A  social- 
ist party  was  thus  created.  This  party  threatened  the 
existence  of  the  monarchy ;  it  also  threatened  the  industrial 
and  commercial  system  in  vogue.  It  believed  in  a  republic 
as  the  only  government  that  the  democracy  could  hope  to 
control;  but  it  differed  from  the  other  republicans  in  that, 
while  they  desired  simply  a  change  in  the  form  of  govern- 
ment, it  desired  a  far  more  sweeping  change  in  society.  As 
early  as  1842  a  German  named  Stein  wrote:  "  The  time  for 
purely  political  movements  in  France  is  past;  the  next 
revolution  must  inevitably  be  a  social  revolution." 

Thus  it  is  evident  that  the  amount  of  discontent  with  the  Widespread 
Government  of  France  was  great  and  growing.    From  nearly  opposition 
every  quarter  enemies  arose.      These  enemies  differed  from  __!:_„   _* 
each  other — they  might  not  be   able  to   co-operate  in   con-  the   Govern' 
structive  work,  but  they  could  co-operate  in  destroying  the  ment. 
existing  system.      There  were  the  moderate  Orleanists,  con- 
vinced friends  of  monarchy,  who  were  repelled  by  the  prev- 
alent corruption  of  Parliament  and  wished  to  end  it ;  there 
were  the  convinced  Republicans,  silenced  but  not  suppressed; 
there  were  the  Socialists,  democratic,  republican.     The  vol- 
ume of  discontent  was  increased  by  the  unpopular  character 


ing   parties. 


14<0  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

of  the  foreign  policy  of  the  ministry,  which  appeared  hu- 
miliatingly  submissive  to  England  on  certain  occasions,  too 
desirous  of  pleasing  the  absolute  and  reactionary  monarchs 
of  central  Europe  on  others, too  cold  towards  Liberals  every- 
where, too  pettily  personal,  also,  in  that  one  of  its  aims  was 
the  advancement  of  the  dynastic  ambitions  of  Louis  Philippe, 
who  sought  to  promote  by  marriage  alliances  the  fortunes  of 
his  family,  even  at  the  expense  of  the  interests  of  the  nation 
which  he  ruled. 
Fusion  of  These   various    groups,    exceedingly    dissatisfied   with   the 

the  oppos-  existing  order,  converged  in  1848,  though  unintentionally 
and  unsyrapathetically,  toward  the  most  violent  and  reck- 
less upheaval  France  had  known  since  1789 — a  movement 
initiated  by  the  moderate  Monarchists,  rapidly  furthered 
by  the  Republicans,  and  in  the  end  partly  dominated  by  the 
Socialists.  Each  of  these  parties  was  by  conviction  and 
by  temperament  violently  opposed  to  the  other.  The  im- 
mediate occasion  for  their  co-operation  was  furnished  by 
the  continued  demand  for  electoral  and  parliamentary  re- 
form. 

The  electoral  and  parliamentary  corruption  of  the  July 
Monarchy  has  been  described.  Year  after  year  the  ministry 
had  proved  itself  stronger  and  had  defiantly  resisted  all 
proposals.  The  King  was  fatuously  opposed  to  reform 
in  itself.  Guizot,  believing  in  growth,  nevertheless  held 
that  the  time  had  not  yet  come  for  any  alteration  in  the 
prevailing  system.  Beating  against  this  wall,  which  seemed 
to  grow  higher  and  more  solid  each  year,  the  Opposi- 
tion came  to  see  that  there  was  no  hope  of  overthrow- 
ing the  obstructionist  ministry  by  ordinary  parliamentary 
methods. 
The  Guizot  constantly   asserted  that  the  demand  for  reform 

was  simply  brought  forward  for  political  purposes,  that 
it  was  the  work  of  a  few,  that  the  people  as  a  whole  were 
entirely  indifferent.  To  prove  the  falsity  of  this  assertion 
the  Opposition  instituted  in  1847  a  series  of  "  reform  ban- 


reform 
banquets." 


THE  REFORM  BANQUETS  141 

quets,"  which  were  to  be  attended  by  the  people  and  addressed 
by  the  reformers.  Petitions  for  reform  were  to  be  circu- 
lated on  these  occasions.  Thus  popular  pressure  would  be 
brought  to  bear  on  Parliament  and  King.  These  banquets 
were  instituted  by  those  loyal  to  the  monarchy,  but  hostile 
to  its  policy.  They  simply  wished  to  change  the  latter. 
Similar  meetings,  however,  were  instituted  by  the  Republic- 
ans, who  were  opposed  to  the  very  existence  of  the  monarchy. 
On   the   18th   of  July,   1847,   Lamartine,   now   rapidly   ad-  Emergence 

vancing  as  a  leader  of  the  latter  party,  prophesied  a  coming  ^ 

fo  x-       J '  r     r^  to    Lamartine. 

revolution.  "  If  the  monarchy,"  said  he,  "  is  unfaithful  to 
the  hopes  that  the  wisdom  of  the  country  reposed  in  1830, 
less  in  its  nature  than  in  its  name,  if  it  surrounds  itself  with 
an  electoral  aristocracy  rather  than  unites  the  entire  nation, 
if  it  allows  us  to  descend  into  the  abyss  of  corruption,  rest 
assured  that  the  monarchy  will  fall,  not  in  its  own  blood 
as  did  that  of  1789,  but  in  the  trap  it  itself  has  set.  And 
after  having  experienced  revolutions  of  liberty  and  counter- 
revolutions of  glory,  you  will  have  a  revolution  of  the  public 
conscience  and  a  revolution  of  contempt." 

Great  enthusiasm  was  aroused  by  these  informal  plebi-  The  people 
scites  all  over  the  country  during  the  summer  and  fall  of  support  the 
1847.  It  was  conclusively  shown  that  the  people  were  reform 
behind  this  demand  for  reform.  But  the  monarchy  remained 
unaffected — still  gave  its  systematic  refusal.  The  King 
denounced  in  his  speech  from  the  throne  this  agitation  "  fo- 
mented by  hostile  or  blind  passions."  He  denied  the  legal 
right  of  the  people  to  hold  such  meetings.  To  test  this 
right  before  the  courts  of  law  the  Opposition  arranged  a 
great  banquet  for  February  22,  1848,  in  Paris.  Eighty- 
seven  prominent  deputies  promised  to  attend.  All  were  to 
meet  in  front  of  the  church  of  the  Madeleine  and  march 
to  the  banquet  hall.  In  the  night  of  February  21-22  the 
Government  posted  orders  forbidding  this  procession  and 
all  similar  meetings.  Rather  than  force  the  issue  the  depu- 
ties who  had  agreed  to  attend  yielded,  though  under  pro- 


U2 


THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 


of  Guizot. 


test.  But  a  vast  crowd  congregated,  of  students,  Avorking- 
men,  and  others.  They  had  no  leader,  no  definite  purpose. 
The  crowd  committed  shght  acts  of  lawlessness,  but  nothing 
serious  happened  that  day.  But  in  the  night  barricades 
arose  in  the  workingnien's  quarters  of  the  city.  Some  shots 
were  fired.  The  Government  called  out  the  National  Guard. 
It  refused  to  march  against  the  insurgents.  Some  of  its 
members  even  began  to  shout,  "  Long  live  Reform !  "  "  Down 
with  Guizot !  "  The  King,  frightened  at  this  alarming  as- 
Resignation  pect,  was  willing  to  grant  reform.  Guizot  would  not  con- 
sent and  consequently  withdrew  from  office.  This  news 
was  greeted  with  enthusiasm  by  the  crowds  and,  in  the 
evening  of  February  23d,  Paris  was  illuminated  and  the 
trouble  seemed  ended.  The  contest  thus  far  had  been  simply 
between  Royalists,  those  w^ho  supported  the  Guizot  ministry, 
and  the  reformers,  and  the  fall  of  Guizot  was  the  triumph 
of  the  latter.  But  the  movement  no  longer  remained  thus 
circumscribed.  The  Repubhcans  now  entered  aggressively 
upon  the  scene,  resolved  to  arouse  the  excited  people  against 
Louis  Philippe  himself  and  against  the  monarchy.  They 
marched  through  the  boulevards  and  made  a  hostile  demon- 
stration before  Guizot's  residence.  Some  unknown  person 
fired  a  shot  at  the  guards.  The  guards  instantly  replied, 
fifty  persons  fell,  more  than  twenty  dead.  This  was  the 
doom  of  the  monarchy.  The  Republicans  seized  the  occa- 
sion to  inflame  the  people  further.  Several  of  the  corpses 
were  put  upon  a  cart  which  was  lighted  by  a  torch.  The 
cart  was  then  drawn  through  the  streets.  The  ghastly 
spectacle  aroused  everywhere  the  angriest  passions ;  cries 
of  "  Vengeance !  "  followed  it  along  its  course.  From  the 
towers  the  tocsin  sounded  its  wild  and  sinister  appeal. 

Thus  began  a  riot  which  grew  In  vehemence  hourly,  and 
which  swept  all  before  it.  The  cries  of  "  Long  live  Reform !  " 
heard  the  day  before,  now  gave  way  to  the  more  ominous 
cries  of  "  Long  live  the  Republic !  "  Finally,  on  Februar}^ 
24th,    the   King   abdicated   in    favor    of   his    grandson,    the 


The    over 
throw  of 
Louis 
Philippe. 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  .JULY  MONARCHY      143 

little  Count  of  Paris,  who  should  be  King  Louis  Philippe  II, 
and  whose  mother,  the  Duchess  of  Orleans,  should  be  regent. 
The  royal  family  left  the  Tuileries  and  escaped  from  Paris 
in  safety.  Another  French  king  took  the  road  to  England 
and  entered  upon  a  life  of  exile,  which  was  to  end  only  with 
death  in  1850. 

The  Government  of  France  had  been  swallowed  up  by 
another  revolution.  The  King  and  the  minister  were  over- 
thrown. Who  would  succeed  them.''  The  King  had  abdi- 
cated in  favor  of  his  grandson.  But  would  the  revolution- 
ists recognize  him.''  The  Duchess  of  Orleans  with  great 
bravery  went  directly  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  with  her 
two  sons,  nine  and  seven  years  old.  A  painful  scene  fol- 
lowed. The  majority  of  the  deputies  hailed  her  as  regent 
and  her  son  as  king,  but  soon  the  mob,  consisting  of  the 
students,  the  Republicans,  and  Socialists  who  had  forced 
the  abdication,  invaded  the  Chamber.  The  president  de- 
clared the  session  closed.  The  mob  continued  in  the  hall, 
re-enforced  by  new  armed  bands,  which  denounced  the  idea 
of  a  regency,  denounced  the  Chamber  and  the  deputies,  and 
cried  "  No  more  Bourbons ;  a  Provisional  Government  and 
after  that  the  Republic."  Out  of  this  wild  turmoil  by  no 
legal  method  arose  a  new  system.  The  republican  deputies  The  rise  of 
finally  declared  the  House  of  Orleans  deposed  and  proclaimed 
a  Provisional  Government  and  Lamartine  read  a  list  of  seven 
names  of  those  who  should  compose  it.  All  were  deputies. 
This  list  had  been  previously  drawn  up  at  the  office  of  the 
National,  the  leading  liberal  newspaper.  The  crowd  in 
the  hall  shouted  their  approval.  This  assembly  did  not 
proclaim  the  Republic. 

While  this  government  was  arising  in  the  Chamber,  an- 
other movement  was  in  progress,  in  another  part  of  the  city. 
The  republican  Socialists,  meeting  in  the  office  of  the  Reform, 
their  organ,  had  drawn  up  a  list  which  had  included  the 
names  on  the  list  of  the  National,  but  had  added  to  them 
three  of  their  own  number,  among  whom  was  Louis  Blanc. 


lU  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  PHILIPPE 

These  established  themselves  in  the  Hotel  de  Ville  and  pro- 
claimed the  Republic,  Thus  there  were  two  governments 
as  a  result  of  the  insurrection.  The  members  chosen  in  the 
Chamber  traversed  the  streets  of  Paris  to  the  Hotel  de  Ville. 
There  the  two  groups  were  fused.  Positions  were  found 
in  the  new  government  for  the  members  of  both.  The  Repub- 
lic was  immediately  proclaimed,  subject  to  ratification  by  the 
people. 


I 


CHAPTER  VII 

CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  TWO 
REVOLUTIONS 

PRUSSIA 

The  French  Revolution  of  1848  was  the  signal  for  the  The  Febm- 

most   wide-reachins;   disturbance   of   the   century.       Revolu-  ^^^  Kevo- 

.  .  lution  a 

tions  broke  out  from  the  Baltic  to  the  Mediterranean,  from  signal  for 

France  to  the  Russian  frontier.  The  whole  system  of  re-  other  revo- 
action,  which  had  succeeded  Waterloo  and  which  had  come  to  l^t^o^s. 
be  personified  in  the  imperturbable  Metternich,  crashed  in 
unutterable  confusion.  But  in  order  to  understand  the 
swiftness  and  completeness  of  this  collapse,  one  must  know 
something  of  the  evolution  of  central  Europe  between  1830 
and  1848,  for  the  revolutions  of  1848  were  no  suddezi  and 
accidental  improvisations,  but  were  simply  the  decisive  and 
dramatic  culmination  of  movements  everywhere  making  for 
change.  The  Revolution  of  1848  was  a  signal  and  an 
encouragement  to  other  peoples  to  attempt  similar  things ; 
it  was  not  a  cause.  Particularly  necessary  is  it  to  trace 
the  inner  evolution  of  Germany,  Austria,  and  Italy  during 
this  period,  which  was  not  at  all  one  of  stagnation,  but 
one  characterized  by  a  great  and  fruitful  fermentation  of 
ideas. 

The  interest  of  German  history  between  1830  and  1848  The  general 
does  not  lie  in  the  evolution  of  political  liberty,  for  political 
repression  and  absolutism  were  the  order  of  the  day.  It  period- 
lies  rather  in  growth  along  economic  lines,  in  intellectual 
achievements  outside  the  domain  of  politics,  and  in  those 
movements  of  opinion  and  of  racial  aspiration  which  ren- 
dered so  notable  and  far-reaching  the  vast  turmoil  of  1848. 

145 


14.6    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 


Evolution 
of 

Prussia. 


Great  in- 
tellectual 
activity. 


For  German  history  the  all-important  matter  is  the  evolu- 
tion during  those  years  of  a  remarkable  situation  in  both 
Prussia  and  Austria,  which  was  highly  favorable  to  revolu- 
tions in  the  fulness  of  time.  The  Confederation  as  a  whole 
had  no  evolution,  but  was  a  sleeping,  hollow  mockery.  The 
evolution  of  the  lesser  states,  important  no  doubt,  must  be 
neglected  in  a  study  of  this  scope.  The  ideas,  personalities, 
tendencies,  and  situations  that  were  to  prove  determinant  for 
central  Europe,  came  not  from  them  but  from  the  two  first- 
class  powers  already  named,  which  stood  confronting  each 
other  in  the  Confederation  and  in  Europe  as  a  whole,  ren- 
dering unity  impossible,  and  both  opposed  to  liberty. 

And  first  of  the  evolution  of  Prussia  during  these  years. 
Political  hberty,  as  we  have  seen,  was  denied.  No  constitu- 
tion was  granted,  no  parliament  created,  but  it  would  not 
be  reasonable  to  emphasize  that  fact  unduly.  Their  absence 
was  not  acutely  felt  save  by  a  small  enlightened  minority. 
Such  liberties  Prussians  had  never  known,  and  there  were 
few  serious  practical  grievances.  The  state  was  well  ad- 
ministered. The  king,  Frederick  William  III  (1797-1840), 
was  honest  and  beloved,  the  administration  hard-working 
and  economical,  the  policies  enlightened.  The  period  be- 
tween 1815  and  1848,  though  politically  unimportant,  was 
immensely  significant  in  other  ways.  While  university  pro- 
fessors and  students  suspected  of  dabbling  in  politics  were 
shamefully  persecuted,  the  regime  was  not  opposed  to  in- 
tellectual progress.  Under  it  great  advances  were  made 
in  all  branches  of  education  from  the  lowest  to  the  highest. 
Intellectual  activity,  forbidden  to  enter  the  political  field, 
overflowed  into  others.  It  was  a  period  of  great  and  durable 
conquests  in  the  domain  of  science,  rich  in  leaders  who  held 
high  the  best  traditions  of  scholarship  and  widened  the 
bounds  of  human  knowledge. 

The  great  political  achievements  of  the  period  lay  in  the 
administrative  and  economic  questions  met  and  solved  by 
Prussian  statesmen.      Prussia  had  to  undergo  the  most  thor- 


REFORMS  IN  PRUSSIA  147 

oiigh     reorganization.        Before    German    unity    could    be  The 

achieved  Prussian  unity  must  be  secured.      The  treaties  of         ^    . 
•^  _  .    ment  of 

1815  had  transformed  Prussia  by  ahnost  doubling  her  terri-  Prussian 
tory  and  her  population.  Out  of  ten  million  inhabitants  unity  im= 
five  million  were  new  subjects,  difficult  to  assimilate:  the  in-  ^^^^  ^^^' 
habitants  of  the  Rhenish  provinces  had  been  for  twenty 
years  a  part  of  the  French  Empire  and  were  strongly  at- 
tached to  French  ideas ;  the  Poles  still  bitterly  regretted  the 
loss  of  their  former  independence;  the  Saxons  resented  their 
annexation  to  Prussia.  These  peoples  did  not  feel  them- 
selves Prussians,  though  fate  had  put  them  under  a  Prussian 
king.  The  task  of  building  anew  the  Prussian  state  out 
of  such  varied  elements,  of  making  a  thoroughly  homo- 
geneous kingdom,  was  rendered  all  the  more  difficult  from 
the  fact  that  Prussia  was  divided  into  two  separate,  un- 
connected parts,  an  eastern  and  a  western,  separated  by 
Hanover,  Brunswick,  and  Hesse-Cassel.  Her  boundaries 
were  not  those  of  a  healthy  state.  These  were  the  problems 
whose  solution  would  take  time.  Meanwhile  certain  definite 
reforms  were  undertaken. 

The  financial  question  was  the  most  urgent,  and  this  was  Revision  ol 
faced  heroically.  The  burden  of  the  Napoleonic  wars  had  ^^^  J^^^^^ 
been  tremendous.  The  Prussian  debt  was  large;  deficits 
were  usual.  By  revising  her  system  of  taxation,  and  by 
rigid  economy,  order  was  finally  brought  about,  there  were 
surpluses  instead  of  deficits,  and  in  1828  government  bonds 
stood  at  par. 

The  fi-reat  interest   of  the  Prussian  Government  in   the  ^^® 

.  question 

material  development   and   prosperity   ot    the   country   was  ^^  ^j^^ 

best  shown  in  its  tariff  policy.      Prussia,  as  has  been  said,  tariff. 

was  divided  into  two  unequal  and  unconnected  parts.      The 

boundaries   were  very   extensive,   increased   still   further   by 

the   fact   that   entirely   within    her    territory   lay    states   or 

fragments  of  other  states  independent  of  her.       Moreover. 

the  economic   conditions   in   the   eastern   part  of   the   realm. 

were   essentially   different   from   those   in    the   western;    the 


11.8    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

one  agricultural,  the  other  industrial.  There  was  nothing 
like  freedom  of  trade  between  the  different  parts.  Indeed, 
there  were  in  old  Prussia  alone  sixty-seven  different  tariff 
systems  in  operation,  separating  district  from  district. 
Cities  were  shut  off  from  the  surrounding  country  districts 
by  tariff  walls,  and  province  from  province.  All  this  meant 
that  commerce  could  not  flourish,  hampered  on  every  side, 
and  that  industries,  the  support  of  commerce,  could  not 
expand,  owing  to  narrow  and  uncertain  markets.  Under 
these  conditions  one  industry  thrived — smuggling.  The 
smugglers'  trade  was  easy,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  fron- 
tiers to  be  guarded  were  over  4,000  miles  long,  a  line  that 
could  only  be  guarded  by  a  very  large  number  of  customs 
officials,  which  would  involve  great  expense.  All  this  was 
changed  in  1818,  under  the  influence  of  a  great  financial 
reformer,  Maassen.  All  internal  customs  were  abolished 
and  free  trade  was  established  throughout  all  Prussia.  Then 
a  tariff,  very  simple  and  covering  few  commodities,  was 
established  against  the  rest  of  the  world.  This  tariff  was 
put  low  enough  to  make  smuggling  unprofitable.  Products 
that  would  be  brought  over  sea  were  taxed  higher,  as  they 
must  enter  by  the  few  ports,  which  could  be  easily  guarded. 
Having  established  a  common  tariff  for  her  own  kingdom, 
Prussia  sought  to  induce  other  German  states  to  enter  into 
union  with  her,  to  adopt  the  same  tariff  against  other  na- 
tions and  free  trade  with  each  other.  She  offered  to  share 
the  total  revenues  collected  pro  rata  according  to  popula- 
tion. The  other  states  protested  vehemently  at  first  against 
what  they  considered  the  high-handed  measures  of  the  larger 
state,  but  they  finally  saw  the  advantages  of  union.  The 
first  to  join  were  those  which  were  entirely  inclosed  or  which 
had  parts  entirely  inclosed  by  Prussia;  whose  commerce 
with  the  outside  world  must  be  through  Prussian  territory. 
The  Between  1819  and  1828  the  little  Thuringian  duchies  entered 

Zollverein.     this  Zollverein,  or  Tariff  Union.      The  southern  and  central 
states  of  Germany  held  aloof  and  even  formed  rival  tariff 


THE  TARIFF  UNION  149 

unions  of  their  own.  These,  however,  did  not  prosper. 
One  by  one  the  other  states  joined  the  Prussian  Union,  led 
thereto  by  the  apparent  advantages  of  free  trade  with  each 
other  and  by  Prussia's  hberal  terms.  By  1842  all,  save  the 
Hanseatic  towns  and  Mecklenburg,  Hanover,  and  Austria, 
had  joined.  The  treaties  between  the  co-operating  states 
upon  which  the  union  rested  were  made  for  brief  periods,  but 
were   constantly   renewed. 

The  advantages  of  the  Zollverein  were  both  economic  and  The  ad- 
political.      Industry  grew  rapidly  by  the  apphcation  of  the  vantages 
principle  of  free  trade  to  the  states  of  Germany.      It  created  ^g-g^^ 
a  real  national  unity  in  economic  matters,  at  a  time  when 
Germany  was  politically  only  the  semblance  of  a  union ;  it 
accustomed  German  states  to  co-operation  without  Austria, 
and  it  taught  them  the  advantages  of  Prussian  leadership. 
Men  began  to  see  that  a  Germany  could  exist  without  Aus- 
tria.     The  Zollverein  is  generally  considered  in  a  very  real 
sense  to  have  been  the  beginning  of  German  unity. 

As  long  as  Frederick  William  III  lived  it  was  recognized  Death  of 

that  no  changes  would  be  made  in  the  political  institutions 

.  ...        William 

of  Prussia.       It  was   tacitly  understood  that  his   declining  jjj^ 

years  should  not  be  disturbed,  that  the  demands  for  reforms 
should  not  be  pressed.  But  when  he  died  in  1840,  says 
von  Treitschke,  "  all  the  long  pent  up  grievances  and  hopes 
of  Prussia  overflowed  irresistibly,  gushing  and  foaming  like 
molten  metal  when  the  spigot  is  knocked  out."  All  eyes 
were  now  turned  upon  his  son  and  successor,  Frederick 
William  IV. 

The  new  King,  forty-five  years  of  age,  was  already  well  Frederick 
known  as  a  man  of  unusual  intellectual  gifts — quick,  mobile,  ' 

enthusiastic,  imaginative,  an  eloquent  conversationalist  and 
public  speaker.  He  was  a  patron  of  learning,  surrounding 
himself  with  scholars,  artists,  and  writers.  Goethe  had  said 
of  him  that  *'  so  great  a  talent  must  awaken  new  talents  in 
others."  From  his  general  intellectual  restlessness  and  lib- 
erality much  was  hoped,  as  it  was  also  known  that  he  had 


150    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

latterl3^  not  approved  tlie  policy  of  liis  father.  This  im- 
pression he  confirmed  by  his  acts  at  the  opening  of  his 
reign.  He  issued  an  amnesty  pardoning  poHtical  prisoners. 
He  restored  Arndt  to  his  professorship  at  Bonn.  He  re- 
leased Jahn.  In  a  series  of  impassioned  utterances  he  spoke 
glowingly  of  Pinissia's  destiny.  It  seemed  that  a  new  and 
liberal  era  was  da\raing. 

But  disillusionment  soon  began.  The  people  wanted  re- 
forms and  expected  them  from  the  new  King.  His  predeces- 
sor had  consented  to  the  creation  of  local  diets  for  local 
The  demand  concerns  in  each  of  the  provinces  into  which  Prussia  was 
for  a  par-  divided.  He  had  promised  a  central  parliament  but  had 
liament.  j-,q^  ]^gp^  1-]-,^  promise.  The  demand  now  was  for  this. 
Would  Frederick  Wilham  IV  grant  it.?  This  question  was 
asked  him  by  the  estates  of  the  Province  of  Prussia.  His 
answer  was  kindly  and  vague.  A  little  later  a  real  answer 
came  in  the  form  of  an  ordinance  which  somewhat  increased 
the  powers  of  the  provincial  estates  and  provided  that  dele- 
gations from  each  should  unite  in  Berlin.  This  was  not  at 
all  what  was  wanted.  Several  of  the  provincial  estates  de- 
manded the  fulfilment  of  the  promises  of  1815.  Books  ap- 
peared discussing  constitutional  questions.  The  press  took 
the  matter  up  vehemently,  the  censorship  having  been  some- 
what slackened.  The  King  apparently  made  no  effort  to 
win  back  the  favor  of  his  people.  His  policy  was  evidently 
purely  reactionary.  Popular  meetings  were  forbidden  in 
certain  provinces ;  the  press,  too  free  for  his  satisfaction, 
was  shackled  again.  Even  the  independence  of  the  judiciary 
was  threatened. 

Year  after  year  went  by  and  the  people  became  impatient 
because  no  parliament  was  created.  The  King,  meanwhile 
wavering  between  the  most  exalted  notions  of  the  divine 
origin  and  nature  of  his  position  and  his  desire  to  live  in 
harmony  with  his  age,  sketched  plan  after  plan  of  an  as- 
sembly which  should  not  be  representative,  which  should  co- 
operate with  him,  and  which  should  quiet  the  insistent  clamor 


THE  UNITED  LANDTAG  OF  1847  151 

of  his  people.     Finally,  on  February  3,  1847,  he  issued  a 

Letter  Patent  which  marks  the  beginning  of  the  constitu-  The   Letter 

tional  history  of  Prussia.     By  this  Patent  it  was  announced     ^  ^^    ° 
,         .  .      .  .      February, 

that  the  king  would   summon   all   the   provincial   assemblies  1347, 

to  meet  in  one  general  assembly  or  United  Landtag  when- 
ever the  needs  of  the  state  should  demand  new  loans,  the 
levying  of  new  taxes,  or  the  augmentation  of  those  already 
existing.  The  United  Landtag  was  to  have  the  right  of 
petition,  and  the  king  might  consult  it  in  regard  to  new 
legislation.  There  were  to  be  two  chambers,  meeting  apart, 
except  when  considering  financial  questions,  the  former  a 
chamber  of  lords,  the  other  of  the  three  estates.  At  first 
enthusiastic,  tlic  people  were  shortly  chagrined  at  the  out- 
come of  all  their  efforts.  The  Landtag  was  not  to  meet 
at  definite  periods  but  only  when  the  king  should  summon 
it.  It  was  to  resemble  a  medieval  diet  more  than  a  modem 
parliament.  Even  its  power  in  financial  matters  was  greatly 
limited.  All  discussion  involving  the  tariff  was  reserved 
for  the  Zollverein.  Provincial  and  local  taxes  remained  to 
be  determined  absolutely  by  the  crown.  In  case  of  war 
the  Government  might  increase  the  existing  taxes,  being 
merely  obliged  to  bring  the  matter  to  the  attention  of  the 
next  Landtag.  Even  the  right  of  petition  was  carefully 
restricted.  The  king  would  receive  petitions  only  when  two- 
thirds  of  both  houses  had  agreed  upon  them. 

This  was  not  the  constitution  the  people  had  been  so  long  Popular 
demanding.      By  it  the  king  was  not  required  ever  to  call  the  dissatis- 
United  Landtag  together.      Moreover,  he  retained  the  com-    ^^  ^°^* 
plete  law-making  power  and  an  almost  unrestricted  power 
over  the  nation's  purse.      The  new  parliament  was  to  repre- 
sent, not  the  people,  but  social  classes. 

Moreover,  in  the  speech  from  the  throne,  with  which 
Frederick  William  IV  opened  this  assembly  in  the  following 
April,  he  took  particular  pains  to  state  that  this  Patent 
was  no  constitution  creating  a  parliament  representing  the 
people  of  Prussia.      "  Never  will  I  allow,"  he  said,  "  a  sheet 


152    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 


of  written  paper  to  come,  like  a  second  Providence,  between 
our  Lord  God  in  Heaven  and  this  land,  to  govern  us  by 
its  paragi'aphs.  The  crown  cannot  and  ought  not  to  de- 
pend upon  the  will  of  majorities.  I  should  never  have  called 
you  together  if  I  had  the  least  idea  that  you  could  dream 
of  playing  the  part  of  so-called  representatives  of  the 
people." 
Conflict  A  conflict  began  at  once  between  the  King  and  the  United 

between        Landtag,  which  developed  into  a  deadlock.      The  Landtag 
Frederick        ^  ^^'  ^  ,.^  rw.i       -r^-  n  i    n    i 

William   IV  demanded  a   real  parliament.      The   Kmg  demanded   loans. 

and  the  Neither  yielded  to  the  other,  and  in  June  1847  the  Landtag 
was  dissolved.  Nothing  had  been  accomplished.  A  grave 
constitutional  crisis  had  been  created.  The  monarch  stood 
in  direct  opposition  to  the  Liberals.  Such  was  the  danger- 
ously overheated  state  of  the  public  mind  when  news  of  the 
revolution  in  Paris  reached  Berlin. 


TTnited 
Landtag. 


Austria 
not  a 
homoge- 
neous  state, 


Political 
stagnation. 


AUSTRIA 

The  history  of  Austria  between  1815  and  1848  resembles 
in  some  respects  that  of  the  German  Confederation  in  that 
it  was  not  the  evolution  of  a  single  homogeneous  state. 
Movements  proceeded  from  several  local  centers.  For  pur- 
poses of  simplification  it  is  well  to  examine  each  in  turn. 
In  the  provinces  of  Austria  proper,  in  the  western  part 
of  the  empire,  the  movement  took  the  form  of  a  demand 
for  the  diminution  of  the  autocratic  system.  There,  as 
elsewhere  in  Europe,  after  1840  a  popular  feeling  that  the 
time  had  come  for  larger  liberty  was  distinctly  perceptible. 
Yet  there  the  difficulty  of  its  achievement  was  at  its  maxi- 
mum. For  as  long  as  Francis  I  lived  there  was  no  hope 
of  sympathy  from  the  throne.  His  successor,  Ferdinand  I 
(1835-48),  was  a  man  of  less  ability  and  was,  moreover, 
mentally  incapacitated  for  rule.  This  meant  that  Metter- 
nich  and  his  colleagues  exercised  nearly  uncontrolled  power. 

During  this  period  little  change  occurred  in  the  conditions 
of  the  Austrian  provinces.      Liberal  opinions  could  not  be 


THE  GROWTH  OF  NATIONALITIES         153 

freely   published   owing  to   the   severity   of  the   censorship; 

yet  there  were  a  few  journalists  and  lawyers  who  managed 

to  express  a  desire  for  some  measure  of  political  freedom 

and  for  a  constitution.      One  significant  feature  of  the  time  The    indus- 

was  the  transition  from  the  old  to  the  new  in  the  economic  ,  ^. 

lution. 

sphere.  The  introduction  of  machinery,  bringing  with  it 
the  factory  system,  was  now  accomplished,  and  was  accom- 
panied by  the  terrible  evils  which  had  marked  this  transition 
in  England  and  in  France.  Many  laborers  were  thrown  out 
of  work,  wandered  about  the  country,  demoralized,  starving, 
and  drifted  to  the  cities,  particularly  to  Vienna,  forming  a 
desperate  element,  easily  incited  to  deeds  of  violence,  as  the 
issue  was  to  show.  An  industrial  crisis  preceded  the  political 
crisis  of  1848  and  profoundly  influenced  its  course. 

The  period  preceding  1848,  poHtically  of  slight  interest.  The   devel- 

was  rendered  notable  by  the  development  of  the  spirit  of  na-  °^™^     ,. 
"^  ,^  ^  .  nationali- 

tionality  among  several  of  the  varied  peoples  who  had  hither-  ^.jgg  -vpithin 
to  been  quiescent  under  the  House  of  Hapsburg.  This  the  empire, 
was  the  most  significant  phenomenon  of  these  years,  as  it 
was  to  be  the  most  permanent  in  its  effects.  This  feeling 
of  separate  individuality,  this  assertion  of  the  rights  of 
nationality,  which  is  one  of  the  principal  features  of  the 
history  of  the  nineteenth  century  everywhere,  had  come  to 
be  the  most  salient  characteristic  of  Austrian  evolution  in 
particular,  and  is  so  still.  Under  the  aegis  of  the  House 
of  Hapsburg  several  nations  were  arising  and  were  strug- 
gling for  a  larger  and  more  independent  place  in  the  col- 
lective state.  This  spirit  was  particularly  pronounced  in 
Bohemia  and  Hungary. 

Bohemia  had  been  united  with  Austria  since  1526.  Its  Bohemia, 
population  consisted  of  Germans  and  of  a  branch  of  the 
Slavic  race  called  Czechs.  The  Germans  had  for  more  than 
two  centuries  been  preponderant.  Their  language  was  that 
of  the  government,  of  educated  people,  the  language  of 
literature  and  science,  the  Czechish  being  regarded  as  fit 
only  for  peasants.      But  after  1815  the  popular  conscious- 


154    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

ness  gradually  awoke.  The  idea  that  the  Czechish  nation- 
ahtj  could  be  revived  took  strong  hold  of  a  few  educated 
men  who  believed  that  Bohemia  should  be  torn  from  German 
control  and  that  the  native  Czechish  element  should  be  put 
in  its  place.  The  movement  was  at  first  confined  to  univer- 
sity men,  was  hterary  and  scientific.  A  group  of  historians 
arose,  of  whom  Palacky  was  the  leader,  who  by  their  his- 
tories of  Bohemia  when  she  had  been  an  independent  kingdom, 
inculcated  the  wish  that  she  might  again  be  one.  Pride 
was  enlisted,  too,  by  reviving  a  knowledge  of  the  ancient 
native  literature.  Henceforth  every  Czech  should  cease 
to  use  German  and  speak  his  own  native  tongue.  This 
movement  grew,  passing  from  university  circles  to  the  mass 
of  the  people.  It  was  directed  against  the  German  office- 
holders in  Bohemia  and  against  the  use  of  German  in  the 
government  and  in  education.  While  during  the  period 
from  1815  to  ISIS  it  accomplished  no  practical  reform,  it 
created  a  public  opinion  and  a  vehement  aspiration  for  na- 
tional independence  that  constituted  an  important  factor  in 
the  general  situation  of  that  year. 
Hungary.  A  more  pronounced  national  and  racial  movement  within 

the  empire  was  going  on  at  the  same  time  in  Hungary, 
a  country  peopled  by  several  different  races  speaking  diff*er- 
ent  languages  and  possessing  different  institutions.  The 
leading  races  were  the  Magyars ;  the  Slavs,  broken  up  into 
several  branches,  north  and  south  of  the  Magj'ars ;  the  Ger- 
mans or  Saxons ;  and  the  Roumanians.  The  Magyars, 
though  numerically  a  minority  of  the  whole  people,  were 
more  numerous  than  any  other  one  race,  were  the  most  de- 
veloped politically,  and  had,  ever  since  they  had  come  into 
the  country  in  the  ninth  century,  regarded  it  as  their  own 
and  had  paid  scant  attention  to  the  other  races.  Two  sec- 
tions of  Hungary,  Croatia,  peopled  almost  entirely  by  Slavs, 
and  Transylvania,  the  majority  of  whose  inhabitants  were 
Roumanians,  were  somewhat  differentiated  from  Hungary 
proper,  where  the  Magyars  predominated,  in  that,  though 


I 


THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  HUNGARY         155 

annexed  countries  and  subject  to  the  king  of  Hungary,  they 
enjoyed  a  certain  measure  of  autonomy.  Croatia,  for  in- 
stance, had  a  viceroy  or  ban  and  a  Diet  of  its  own.  Transyl- 
vania had  its  Estates,  infrequently  convoked. 

Hungary  had  a  constitution  dating  in  part  from  the  thir-  The 

teenth  century.       It  was  in   1222   that  the  Golden  Bull  of  Hungarian 

-  •  1  -IT,,  Constitu- 

Andreas   II   was   issued,   nearly   contemporary   with   Magna  ^^^^ 

Charta.  There  was  a  Diet  or  Parliament  meeting  in 
Presburg  in  two  chambers,  or  Tables,  as  they  were  called ; 
a  Table  of  Magnates,  composed  of  the  highest  nobility,  of 
certain  of  the  higher  clergy  and  office-holders;  and  a  Table 
of  Deputies,  chosen  by  the  congregations  or  county  assem- 
blies, and  by  the  free  cities.  Hungary  was  divided  into 
more  than  fifty  counties,  each  one  of  which  had  its  local 
assembly  or  congregation. 

The  nobility  alone  possessed  political  power.     Only  nobles  The   impor- 
sat  in  the  national  Diet,  and  only  nobles  were  members  of  *^^ce  of  the 
the  county  assemblies.      The  nobility  was  itself  divided  into 
two  sections,  the  very  wealthy,  the  Magnates,  about  five  hun- 
dred in  number,  and  the  petty  nobility,  numbering  perhaps 
seven  hundred  thousand,  poor,  in  many  cases  uneducated  and 
hardly  to  be  distinguished  from  the  peasants  among  whom 
they  lived,  save  by  their  privileges.     Everywhere  feudalism 
flourished  in  its  most  flagrant  fonn  and  perhaps  as  nowhere 
else  in  Europe.       The  aristocracy  not  only  constituted  all 
the   assemblies,   national   and   local,   but   they   filled   all   the 
offices.       They  enjoyed  old  feudal  dues   and  paid  no  taxes 
themselves.       The  very  tax  intended  to  defray  the  expense  The 
of  the  local  administration,  which  they  monopolized,  was  laid  prevalence 

upon   the   class   beneath.       Their   lands    could   be    alienated  ^  ,.^^" 
•^  ^  _  dalism, 

only  to  members  of  their  own  order.  Their  palaces  in  the 
cities  were  not  subject  to  municipal  jurisdiction.  The  en- 
tire class  of  the  bourgeoisie  had  only  one  vote  in  the  Diet. 
Neither  bourgeoisie  nor  the  laboring  class  possessed  any 
power.  The  immense  mass  of  the  population,  the  peasantry, 
were  subject  to  a  most  oppressive  serfdom. 


156   CENTRAI.  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

It  is  evident  that  though  Hungary  had  a  constitution 
it  was  not  of  the  modern  type  but  of  the  medievah  To 
take  a  phice  among  the  progressive  lands  of  Europe,  Hun- 
gary needed  to  be  brought  witliin  the  region  of  modern  ideas. 
One  of  those  who  saw  this  and  whose  whole  activity  Avas  to 
contribute  powerfully  to  this  modernization,  was  Count  Ste- 
Szechenyi  phen  Szechenyi,  a  great  Hungarian  Magnate  who,  himself 
and  reform.  ^^  aristocrat,  boldly  told  his  fellow-aristocrats  that  the 
time  for  reform  had  come,  that  they  must  reform  them- 
selves, and  must  change  radically  the  conditions  of  their 
country.  He  was  rather  a  social  than  a  political  reformer, 
interested  chiefly  in  the  encouragement  of  material  prosper- 
ity, which  necessitated  the  removal  of  many  abuses  from 
which  the  aristocracy  profited.  He  devoted  his  time,  his 
mone}'',  and  his  immense  prestige  to  social  and  economic  im- 
provement, to  the  draining  of  marshes,  the  building  of  roads 
and  tunnels  and  bridges,  the  clearing  of  the  Danube  for  nav- 
igation. His  aim  was  to  make  Hungary  a  busy,  prosperous, 
modern  industrial  state  instead  of  an  illustration  of  belated 
medievalism.  He  encouraged  the  foundation  of  learned 
societies,  the  use  of  the  national  language,  the  establishment 
of  a  national  theater.  His  work  was  mainly  outside  the 
Diet  and  consisted  chiefly  of  his  vigorous  writings  and  his 
example.  He  was  not  a  political  revolutionist,  not  an 
enemy  of  Austria.  The  spirit  in  which  he  worked  was 
shown  by  his  admonition  to  his  countrymen :  "  Do  not  con- 
stantly trouble  yourselves  with  the  vanished  glories  of  the 
past,  but  rather  let  your  determined  patriotism  bring  about 
the  prosperity  of  the  beloved  fatherland.  Many  there  are  who 
think  that  Hungary  has  been,  but  I  for  my  part  like  to 
think  that  Hungary  shall  be.'' 
The  policy  Meanwhile  the  Diet,  controlled  in  both  houses  by  the 
of  the  Magyar  aristocracy,  accomplished  little  in  the  direction  of 

reform.  It  was  not  willing  to  curtail  its  own  privileges. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  Avilling  to  assert  itself  against 
the  Austrian  Government,  to  attempt  to  gain  a  larger  in- 


THE  AMBITIONS  OF  THE  MAGYARS        157 

dependence  for  Hungary  in  the  collective  state.      One  gain 

it  made — that  concerning  the  Magyar  language. 

Latin  was  the  language  used  in  the  Hungarian  Diet.      It  The 

was  the  language  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  had 

°      °  question. 

formerly  been  the  language  of  diplomacy.  In  a  country 
where  so  many  tongues  were  spoken  its  use  seemed  a 
felicitous  arrangement,  favoring  no  one  race.  It  was  neu- 
tral. But  the  Magyars,  now  alive  with  the  spirit  of  self- 
assertion,  sought  to  depose  Latin  and  to  place  Magyar  in  its 
stead  as  the  official  language.  This  they  finally  achieved  in 
1844.  The  Croatian  deputies,  on  the  other  hand,  wished 
still  to  speak  Latin,  but  were  not  permitted  to.  The  Mag- 
yars showed  that  their  desire  was  not  the  freedom  of  the 
several  peoples  of  which  Hungary  was  composed,  but  only 
their  own  freedom,  indeed,  the  freedom  to  impose  their 
will  upon  others.  Their  object  was  the  complete  Magyar- 
ization  of  all  who  lived  in  Hungary,  were  they  Croatians, 
Servians,  Roumanians,  or  what  else.  In  this  struggle  over 
language  lay  the  germ  of  a  conflict  of  races  which  was  later 
to  be  most  disastrous  to  the  Magyars  themselves.  They  were 
not  willing  to  grant  to  others  the  rights  which  they  had 
demanded  for  themselves. 

While  the  Hungarian  Diet  was  zealous  in  asserting  the  Rise  of  a 
claims  of  Hungary  against  Austrian  domination,  and  was  '^*'*^<'*1 
eager  to  air  Hungarian  grievances  against  the  Imperial  Gov- 
ernment, it  refused  to  undertake  any  large  measure  of  inter- 
nal reform.  The  Magnates,  intent  upon  the  preservation  of 
their  unrivaled  position,  blocked  the  way  of  even  those 
changes  which  the  other  chamber,  representative  of  the 
numerous  lower  nobility,  was  disposed  to  grant.  Gradually 
there  grew  up  as  a  result  a  party  much  more  radical,  nour- 
ished in  the  ideas  of  western  Europe,  democratic,  and  be- 
lieving that  the  existing  medieval  institutions,  the  Diet  and 

the  county  assemblies,  must  be  thoroughly   reorganized  or 

Louis 
swept    away    before    the    new    ideas    could    be  worked    out.  Kossuth 

This    Liberal    party    was    led    by    Louis    Kossuth,    one    of  1802-1894. 


158    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

Hung-arv's  greatest  heroes,  and  Francis  Dcak,  whose  per- 
sonahtj  is  less  striking,  but  whose  services  to  his  country 
were  to  be  more  solid  and  enduring.  Kossuth  had  first 
come  into  notice  as  the  editor  of  a  paper  which  described 
in  vi\dd  and  liberal  vein  the  debates  in  the  Diet.  When  it 
was  forbidden  to  print  these  reports  he  had  them  litho- 
graphed. When  this  was  forbidden  he  had  them  written 
out  by  hand  by  a  corps  of  amanuenses  and  distributed  by 
servants.  Finally  he  was  arrested  and  sentenced  to  prison. 
During  his  imprisonment  of  three  years  Kossuth  applied 
himself  to  serious  studies,  particularly  to  that  of  the  English 
language,  with  such  success  that  he  was  able  later  to  address 
large  audiences  in  England  and  the  United  States  with 
remarkable  effect.  In  1840  he  was  released  and  obtained 
permission  to  edit  a  daily  paper. 

After  1840  the  mass  of  the  nation  turned  away 
from  Szechenyi  and  toward  Kossuth  and  Deak.  Szechenyi, 
a  Magnate,  wished  the  gradual  reform  of  his  country  from 
above,  and  had  no  sympathy  with  democratic  movements. 
Kossuth,  on  the  other  hand,  was  the  very  incarnation  of  the 
great  democratic  ideas  of  the  age.  Sharing  fully  Szechen- 
yi's  desire  to  place  Hungary  in  the  front  rank  of  modern 
nations,  to  develop  its  material  prosperity,  its  civilization, 
he  did  not  believe  it  possible  to  accomphsh  this  by  the  meth- 
ods hitherto  followed,  and  without  a  thoroughly  modem 
constitutional  government.  He  believed  that  free  political 
institutions  contribute  directly  to  material  well-being  and  to 
civilization. 

Kossuth,  now  as  a  brilliant  editor  and  as  an  even  more 
brilliant  orator,  conducted  an  agitation  that  had  little  in 
common  with  the  reform  movement  of  the  Liberals  up  to 
this  time.  He  did  not  believe  that  the  necessary  reforms 
could  ever  be  brought  about  by  existing  agencies — either  by 
the  Diet  or  by  the  powerful  county  assemblies,  both  con- 
trolled by  the  nobility.  He  wished  to  erase  all  distinctions 
between  noble  and  non-noble,  to  fuse  all  into  one  common 


HUNGARY  IN  1847  159 

whole.      He  demanded  democratic  reforms  in  every  depart- 
ment of  the  national  life;  abolition  of  the  privileges  of  the 
nobility  and  of  their  exemption  from  taxation ;  equal  rights 
and  equal  burdens  for  all  citizens;  trial  by  jury;  reform  of 
the  criminal  code.    Kossuth's  impassioned  appeals  were  made 
directly  to  the  people.      He  sought  to  create,  and  did  create, 
a   powerful    public    opinion    clamorous    for    change.       This 
vigorous  liberal  opposition  to  the  established  order,  an  op- 
position ably  led  and  full  of  fire,  grew  rapidly.      In   1847 
it  published  its  programme,  drawn  up  by  Deak.     This  de-  ^^^ 
manded  the  taxation  of  the  nobles,  the  control  by  the  Diet  .^     Hunea- 
of  all  national   expenditures,   larger   liberty   for   the  press,  rians  in 
and   a   complete   right   of   public   meeting   and   association ;  1847. 
it  demanded  also  that  Hungary  should  not  be  subordinate 
to  Austrian  policy,  and  to  the  Austrian  provinces.       Such 
was  the  situation  when  the  great  reform  wave  of  1848  began 
to  sweep  over  Europe. 

ITALY 

The  Italian  revolutions  of  1820  and  1821,  and  of  1831  and  Italy  after 

1831 

1832   had  had  no   depth   of  root,  no  powers  of  endurance 

and  had  been  easily  crushed  out  by  a  few  thousand  Austrian 
bayonets.  The  humiliation  of  liberal-minded  Italians  was 
great  indeed.  It  was  clear  to  all  that  the  methods  hitherto 
employed  would  be  inadequate  to  the  end.  The  next  fifteen 
years  were  devoted  to  a  deeper  study  of  the  problem,  to  the 
elaboration  of  several  plans  for  its  solution,  to  the  long  and 
patient  processes  of  preparing  for  an  independent  national 
existence  a  people  sorely  lacking  the  most  essential  elements 
characteristic  of  such  a  state.  During  this  period  a  group  importance 
of  writers  figure  with  unusual  prominence.  The  previous  of  a  group 
revolutions  had  failed,  partly  at  least,  because  of  the  narrow 
basis  on  which  they  rested.  Disaffected  army  circles  and 
members  of  a  loosely  organized,  incompetently  directed  secret 
society,  the  Carbonari,  had  attempted  these  insurrections. 
The  basis  was  narrow  at  best;  moreover,  the  Italians  had 


160    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

not  yet  learned  the  fundamental  necessity  of  solidarity.  In- 
surrections were  pitifully  local ;  Italians  of  different  states 
rendered  each  other  no  assistance,  or  only  the  slightest,  in 
movements  that  would  have  a  common  advantage  for  all  and 
that  to  succeed  must  have  the  support  of  all.  It  was  im- 
perative that  a  universal  mental  state  be  created,  that  a 
common  aspiration  characterize  the  liberal  elements  every- 
where, that  an  Italy  of  the  imagination  and  affection  should 
exist,  even  if  the  Italy  of  reality  was  only  an  expression 
of  geography.  All  Italians  must  hold  a  common  set  of 
political  ideas,  whether  they  be  Piedmontese,  Sicilians,  Vene- 
tians, or  subjects  of  the  Pope.  To  bring  this  about  was 
the  work  of  several  gifted  men,  working  mainly  through 
the  channel  of  literature. 
Joseph  Foremost  among  these  was  Joseph  Mazzini.     Mazzini  was 

'        the  spiritual  force  of  the  Italian  resurrection,  the  prophet 
1805-1872.  '  i-     r 

of  a  state  that  was  not  yet  but  was  to  be,  destined  from 

youth  to  feel  with  extraordinary  intensity  a  holy  mission 
imposed  upon  him.  He  was  born  in  1805  in  Genoa,  his 
father  being  a  physician  and  a  professor  in  the  university. 
Even  in  his  boyhood  he  was  morbidly  impressed  with  the 
unhappiness  and  misery  of  liis  country.  "  In  the  midst  of 
the  noisy,  tumultuous  life  of  the  students  around  me  I  was," 
he  says,  in  his  interesting  though  fragmentary  autobiog- 
raphy, "  somber  and  absorbed  and  appeared  like  one  sud- 
denly grown  old.  I  childishly  determined  to  dress  always 
in  black,  fancying  myself  in  mourning  for  my  country." 
It  was  after  the  failure  of  1821  that  Mazzini  first  became 
conscious  of  the  mission  of  his  life.  While  walking  one  Sun- 
day with  his  mother  and  a  friend  in  the  streets  of  Genoa, 
they  were  addressed,  he  says,  "  by  a  tall,  dark-bearded  man 
with  a  severe,  energetic  countenance  and  a  fiery  glance  that  I 
have  never  since  forgotten.  He  held  out  a  white  handker- 
chief towards  us,  merely  saying,  *  For  the  refugees  of 
Italy.'"  The  incident,  simple  as  it  was,  made  a  profound 
impression  upon  Mazzini's  ardent  nature.     "  The  idea  of  an 


MAZZINI  AND  "  YOUNG  ITALY  "  161 

existing  wrong  in  my  country  against  which  it  was  a  duty  His   intense 

to  struggle,  and  the  thought  that  I,  too,  must  bear  my  part  P*''"^"^^- 

in  that  struggle,  flashed  before  my  mind  on  that  day,  for  the 

first  time,  never  again  to  leave  me.     The  remembrance  of 

those  refugees,  many  of  whom  became  my  friends  in  after 

life,  pursued  me  wherever  I  went  by  day  and  mingled  with 

my  dreams  by  night.     I  would  have  given,  I  know  not  what, 

to  follow  them.      I  began  collecting  names  and  facts,  and 

studied  as  best  I  might  the  records  of  that  heroic  struggle, 

seeking  to  fathom  the  causes  of  its  failure." 

As  Mazzini  grew  up  all  his  inclinations  were  toward  a 
literary  life.  "  A  thousand  visions  of  historical  dramas  and 
romances  floated  before  my  mental  eye."  But  this  dream 
he  abandoned,  "  my  first  great  sacrifice,"  for  political  agita- 
tion. He  joined  the  Carbonari,  not  because  he  approved  even 
then  of  their  methods,  but  because  at  least  they  were  a  revolu- 
tionary organization.  As  a  member  of  it,  he  was  arrested  His  impris- 
in  1830.  The  governor  of  Genoa  told  Mazzini's  father  that^""^®"*' 
his  son  was  "  gifted  with  some  talent,"  but  was  "  too  fond  of 
walking  by  himself  at  night  absorbed  in  thought.  What  on 
earth  has  he  at  his  age  to  think  about?  We  don't  like 
young  people  thinking  without  our  knowing  the  subject 
of  their  thoughts."  Mazzini  was  imprisoned  in  the  fortress 
of  Savona.  Here  he  could  only  see  the  sky  and  the  sea, 
"  the  two  grandest  things  in  Nature,  except  the  Alps," 
he  said.  After  six  months  he  was  released,  but  was  forced 
to  leave  his  country.  For  nearly  all  of  forty  years  he 
was  to  lead  the  bitter  life  of  an  exile  in  France,  in  Switzer- 
land, but  chiefly  in  England,  which  became  his  second  home. 

After  his  release  from  prison  Mazzini  founded  in  1831  a  Founder  of 
society,  "  Young  Italy,"  destined  to  be  an  important  factor  °''^^S 
in  making  the  new  Italy.  The  Carbonari  had  led  two  revolu- 
tions and  had  failed.  Moreover,  he  disliked  that  organization 
as  being  merely  destructive  in  its  aim,  having  no  definite  plan 
of  reconstruction.  "  Revolutions,"  he  said,  "  must  be  made 
by  the  people  and  for  the  people."      His  own  society  must 


162    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

be  a  secret  organization ;  otherwise  it  would  be  stamped  out. 
But  it  must  not  be  merely  a  body  of  conspirators ;  it  must 
be  educative,  proselyting,  seeking  to  win  Italians  by  its 
moral  and  intellectual  fervor  to  an  idealistic  view  of  life, 
a  self-sacrificing  sense  of  duty.  Only  those  under  forty 
were  to  be  admitted  to  membership,  because  his  appeal  was 
particularly  to  the  young.  "  Place  youth  at  the  head  of 
the  insurgent  multitude,"  he  said,  "  you  know  not  the  secret 
of  the  power  hidden  in  these  youthful  hearts,  nor  the  magic 
influence  exercised  on  the  masses  by  the  voice  of  youth.  You 
will  find  among  the  young  a  host  of  apostles  of  the  new 
religion."  With  Mazzini  the  liberation  and  unification  of 
The  Italy  was  indeed  a  new  religion,  appealing  to  the  loftiest 

methods  of  emotions,  entailing  complete  self-sacrifice,  complete  absorp- 
*  tion  in  the  ideal,  and  the  young  were  to  be  its  apostles. 
Theirs  was  to  be  a  missionary  life.  He  told  them  to  travel, 
to  bear  from  land  to  land,  from  village  to  village,  the  torch 
of  liberty,  to  expound  its  advantages  to  the  people,  to 
establish  and  consecrate  the  cult.  He  told  them  to  "  climb 
the  mountains  and  share  the  humble  food  of  the  laborer ; 
to  visit  the  workshops  and  the  artizans;  to  speak  to  them 
of  their  rights,  of  the  memories  of  their  past,  of  their  past 
glories,  of  their  former  commerce ;  to  recount  to  them  the 
endless  oppression  of  which  they  were  ignorant,  because  no 
one  took  it  upon  himself  to  reveal  it."  Let  them  not  quail 
before  the  horrors  of  torture  and  imprisonment  that  might 
await  them  in  the  holy  cause.  "  Ideas  grow  quickly  when 
watered  with  the  blood  of  martyrs."  Never  did  a  cause 
have  a  more  dauntless  leader,  a  man  of  purity  of  life,  a 
man  of  imagination,  of  poetry,  of  audacity,  gifted,  more- 
over, with  a  marvelous  command  of  persuasive  language. 
The  response  was  overwhelming.  By  1833  the  society  reck- 
oned 60,000  members.  Branches  were  founded  everywhere. 
Garibaldi,  whose  name  men  were  later  to  conjure  with,  joined 
it  on  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea.  This  is  the  romantic 
proselyting   movement   of   the   nineteenth   century,    all   the 


THE  AIMS  OF  "YOUNG  ITALY"  163 

more  remarkable  from  the  fact  that  its  members  were  un- 
known men,  bringing  to  their  work  no  advantage  of  wealth 
or  social  position.  But,  as  their  leader  wrote  later,  "  All 
great  national  movements  begin  with  the  unknown  men  of 
the  people,  without  influence  except  for  the  faith  and  will 
that  counts  not  time  or  difficulties." 

The  programme  of  this  society  was  clear  and  emphatic.  The   aims 

First,  Austria  must  be  driven  out.      This  was  the  condition  °       ^ 

society, 
precedent  to  all  success.      War  must  come — the  sooner  the 

better.  Let  not  Italians  rely  on  the  aid  of  foreign  govern- 
ments, upon  diplomacy,  but  upon  their  own  unaided  strength. 
Austria  could  not  stand  against  a  nation  of  twenty  millions 
fighting  for  their  rights. 

At   a   time   when   the   obstacles   seemed   insuperable,  when  TTnity  a 

but  few  Italians  dreamed  of  unity  even  as  an  ultimate  ideal,  .P/**;  ^'^^    ® 

.  .  ideal. 

Mazzini  declared  that  it  was  a  practicable  ideal,  that  the 

seemingly  impossible  was  easily  possible  if  only  Italians  would 
dare  to  show  their  power ;  and  his  great  significance  in  Italian 
history  is  that  he  succeeded  in  imparting  his  burning  faith 
to  multitudes  of  others.  "  The  one  thing  wanting  to  twenty 
millions  of  Italians,  desirous  of  emancipating  themselves, 
is  not  power,  but  faith,'^  he  said.  His  life  was  one  long 
apostolate,  devoted  to  the  preaching  of  the  true  gospel.  His 
writings  thrilled  with  confidence  and  hope.  "  Young  Italy 
must  be  neither  a  sect  nor  a  party,  but  a  faith  and  an 
apostolate."  But  if  Italy  were  united  what  should  be 
its  form  of  government.''  Mazzini  believed  that  it  should 
be  a  republic,  because  sovereignty  resides  essentially  in  the 
people,  and  can  only  completely  express  itself  in  that  form. 
Moreover,  "  our  great  memories  are  republican,"  and  "  there 
are  no  monarchical  elements  in  Italy,"  no  dynasty  rendered 
illustrious  by  glory  or  by  important  services  to  Italy, 
"  no  powerful  and  respected  aristocracy  to  take  the  inter- 
mediate place  between  the  throne  and  the  people."  That 
a  solution  of  the  Italian  problem  lay  in  combining  the  exist- 
ing states  into  a  federation,  Mazzini  did  not  for  a  moment 


164,    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 


Mazzini   as 
a  conspir- 
ator. 


Gioberti, 
1801-1852. 


believe.  Every  argument  for  federation  was  a  stronger 
argument  for  unity.  "  Never  rise  in  any  other  name  than 
that  of  Italy  and  of  all  Italy." 

Mazzini's  work,  when  it  passed  from  the  realms  of  ex- 
hortation, of  ideas,  to  practice,  proved  ineffective.  Young 
Italy  attempted  several  insurrections  which  were  less  im- 
portant and  less  successful  than  those  conducted  by  the 
Carbonari.  He  himself  lacked  some  of  the  qualities  of 
practical  leadership.  He  was  dogmatic,  intolerant.  He 
underestimated  the  strength  of  the  opposition.  As  a  man 
of  action  he  was  not  successful.  Nevertheless  is  he  one  of 
the  chief  of  the  makers  of  Italy.  He  and  the  society  which 
he  founded  constituted  a  leavening,  quickening  force  in  the 
realm  of  ideas.  Around  them  grew  up  a  patriotism  for  a 
country  that  existed  as  yet  only  in  the  imagination.  Their 
influence  even  reached  the  king  of  Piedmont,  who  had  driven 
Mazzini  into  exile  and  who  kept  him  there.  "  Ah,  Ricci," 
said  Charles  Albert,  "  the  form  of  governments  is  not  eternal ; 
we  shall  march  with  the  times." 

But  to  many  serious  students  of  the  Italian  problem  Maz- 
zini seemed  far  too  radical;  seemed  a  mystic  and  a  rhetori- 
cian full  of  resounding  and  thrilling  phrases,  but  with  little 
practical  sense.  Men  of  conservative  temperament  could  not 
follow  him.  Repelled  by  the  needless  waste  of  life  in  small 
and  pitifully  weak  insurrections,  alienated  by  the  sweeping 
character  of  his  demands,  these  moderate  reformers  thought 
that  the  problem  was  of  a  different  nature  and  ought  to  re- 
ceive a  different  solution.  They  began  about  1840  to  ex- 
press their  views  in  books  which  were  widely  read  and  wliich 
exerted  a  considerable  influence. 

One  of  these  was  "  The  Moral  and  Civil  Primacy  of  the 
Italians,"  a  book  by  a  Piedmontese  priest,  Gioberti,  forced, 
like  Mazzini,  to  live  abroad  in  exile  many  years  because 
of  his  radicalism.  Gioberti  believed  that  as  Italy  had  been 
the  fatherland  of  Dante  and  Napoleon,  so  it  must  always 
be  the  "  home  of  creative  genius."     If  so,  it  must  occupy 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  ITALY  165 

no  less  a  position  in  the  world  than  independence.  He 
believed  in  independence  as  fervidly  as  did  Mazzini,  but  he 
did  not  believe  in  the  possibility  of  Italian  unity,  for  Italy 
had  been  too  long  divided.  The  divisions  were  deep-seated, 
historic,  insuperable.  Unity  could  never  be  brought  about 
by  peaceful  methods,  and  ought  never  to  be  attempted  by 
force.  Gioberti  believed  in  a  federation  of  the  states  of 
Italy  under  the  presidency  or  leadership  of  the  Pope.  Thus 
Italy  would  be  secure  from  foreign  aggression  or  control 
and  a  free  field  would  be  opened  for  all  kinds  of  internal 
improvement.  He  held  that  the  genius  of  Italy  was  mon- 
archical and  aristocratic,  whereas  Mazzini  had  declared  it 
to  be  republican  and  democratic.  He  believed  that  the 
futility  of  conspiracies  and  secret  societies  and  insurrections 
had  been  proved,  that  they  did  not  further  but  hindered  the 
cause.  He  concurred  with  Mazzini  in  believing  in  inde- 
pendence. 

But  to  many  who  did  not  agree  with  Mazzini,  Gioberti's  D'Azeglio, 

1798-1866 
idea  that  hope  lay  in  the  Pope  seemed  preposterous.      This 

attitude  was  expressed  by  D'Azeglio  in  his  "  Recent  Events 
in  Romagna "  (1846),  a  scathing  commentary  on  the 
wretched  misgovernment  of  the  Pope  within  his  own  do- 
minions, a  vivid  portrayal  of  the  evils  under  which  his 
subjects  groaned.  D'Azeglio  also  denounced  the  republican 
attempts  at  insurrection.  Hope  lay,  in  his  opinion,  in  the 
king  of  Piedmont. 

Still  another  point  of  view  was  represented  by  Cesare  Balbo  Balbo, 
in  his  "Hopes  of  Italy"  (1844).  He  too  was  a  Pied- ^''^^■^^^3- 
montese.  He  did  not  believe  in  unity;  that  was  a  madman's 
dream.  Like  Gioberti,  he  believed  in  federation,  but  federa- 
tion could  not  be  accomplished  as  long  as  Austria  remained 
an  Italian  power.  "  Without  national  independence  other 
good  things  are  as  nought."  Austria  then  must  be  elim- 
inated, but  how.?  Not  by  a  war  against  her  of  the  Italian 
people  or  of  the  Italian  princes,  nor  yet  by  foreign  aid, 
but  by   the   disruption   of   the   Turkish   Empire,   wliich  he 


166    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

felt  to  be  near  at  hand.  Might  not  Austria  expand  east- 
ward at  the  expense  of  the  Sultan,  and  might  she  not  then 
"make  Italy  a  present  of  her  independence?"  Certainly 
a  fanciful  idea.  Balbo  pointed  out  the  defects  of  the  Italian 
character,  and  urged  his  countrymen  to  cast  off  their  indo- 
lence, to  cease  to  be  "  the  land  of  the  olive  and  the  orange," 
and  to  develop  strength  and  earnestness  of  character. 
The  Eisor-  Out  of  this  fermentation  of  ideas  grew  a  more  vigorous 
gimento.  spirit  of  unrest,  of  dissatisfaction,  of  aspiration.  This  is 
the  beginning  of  what  is  called  in  Italian  the  Risorgimento — 
the  resurrection.  Although  ideas  of  how  that  resurrection 
should  be  brought  about  were  at  variance  with  each  other, 
every  utterance  urged  it  forward.  No  political  party  was 
organized,  but  a  general  state  of  mind  was  created  which 
held  that  Italy  must  become  independent,  which  meant  that 
Austrian  influence  must  be  eliminated,  and  that  the  Italians 
could  do  this  themselves,  if  they  only  would.  The  watch- 
word was  given  by  Charles  Albert,  King  of  Piedmont.  When 
asked  how  this  great  work  could  be  accomplished,  he  said, 
"  Italia  fara  da  se,"  Italy  will  do  it  alone. 
Pius  IX,  Events  in  the  realm  of  politics  only  intensified  the  effect 

i»4fi'ift7«  °^  these  books,  seeming  to  open  wide  the  door  of  hope.  In 
1846  a  new  Pope  was  elected,  Pius  IX.  It  was  considered 
auspicious  that  he  was  chosen  by  the  anti-Austrian  mem- 
bers of  the  conclave.  He  was  known  to  have  read  Gioberti. 
His  first  acts  were  liberal.  He  pardoned  political  offenders, 
thus  condemning  his  predecessor's  policy.  He  appointed 
a  commission  to  consider  the  question  of  railways,  whose 
introduction  had  been  opposed  by  his  predecessor,  one  reason 
having  been,  it  was  said,  his  belief  that  they  would  "  work 
harm  to  religion."  He  protested  against  the  Austrian  occu- 
pation of  Ferrara.  Metternich  viewed  this  tendency  with 
alarm.  He  had  previously  said  that  a  liberal  Pope  was 
an  impossibility.  Now  that  there  appeared  to  be  one,  he 
declared  it  the  greatest  misfortune  of  the  age.  The  Pope's 
statement  "  that  he  was  resolved  to  preserve  all  liis  author- 


1846-1878. 


REFORMS  IN  PIEDMONT  167 

ity  "  passed  unheeded  in  the  momentary  enthusiasm.      "  Be 
a  behever,"  wrote  Mazzini  to  him,  "  and  unite  Italy." 

Reforms  were  speedily  granted  in  Tuscany  and  in  Pied- 
mont by  the  princes,  stimulated  by  the  spectacle  of  a  re- 
forming Pope.  A  citizens'  guard  was  established  in  the 
former,  that  is,  the  people  were  given  arms.  This  they 
believed  would  henceforth  make  despotism  impossible. 
Charles  Albert  of  Piedmont,  hitherto  called  the  "  Hesitating  Charles 
King,"  because  of  his  constant  vacillation  between  absolutism  ■^^°^"' 

TTiTio"   nf 

and  liberalism,  now  veered  toward  the  latter,  influenced  pig^niont, 
by  the  action  of  the  Pope  and  by  the  consensus  of  ideas 
represented  in  the  Risorgimento.  In  October  1847  he  issued 
a  decree  granting  many  reforms  in  local  government,  the 
organization  of  the  police,  and  the  censorship  of  the  press. 
Shortly  afterward  he  proclaimed  the  civil  emancipation  of 
Protestants.  These  reforms  were  received  with  great  en- 
thusiasm, an  enthusiasm  vastly  augmented  by  a  letter  which 
he  sent  at  this  time  to  a  scientific  congress  in  which  he  said: 
"  If  Providence  sends  us  a  war  of  Italian  independence 
I  will  mount  my  horse  with  my  sons.  I  will  place  myself 
at  the  head  of  an  army.  .  .  .  What  a  glorious  day  it  will 
be  in  which  we  can  raise  the  cry  of  a  war  for  the  independence 
of  Italy!" 

In  January  1848  a  revolution  broke  out  in  the  Kingdom 
of  Naples,  the  first  of  that  year  of  revolutions.  The  king, 
Ferdinand  II,  was  forced  to  yield  to  the  demand  for  a  con- 
stitution. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  Italy  at  the  opening  of  1848.  Italy  on 

The  demand  for  reform  was  universal,  but  now  news  arrived    ,         , 

'  ^  of  revolu- 

which  caused  Italians  speedily  to  pass  on  from  this  to  a  tion. 
far  greater  undertaking,  the  ending  of  foreign  domination. 
The  news  was  that  the  monarchy  of  Louis  Philippe  was 
overthrown ;  that  the  Second  Republic  was  declared ;  that 
Germany  had  risen ;  that  Austria  was  in  the  throes  of  dis- 
memberment ;  that  Metternich's  system  had  collapsed,  and 
that  he  himself  had  been  driven  into  exile  whither  he  had 


168    CENTRAL  EUROPE  BETWEEN  REVOLUTIONS 

previously  driven  so  many.  The  hour  for  Italy  seemed  to 
have  struck  in  the  hour  of  the  distress  of  Austria.  For 
the  year  184«8  was  to  be  one  of  revolution  the  like  of  which 
Europe  had  not  known  since  the  Napoleonic  period.  Events 
were  to  succeed  each  other  of  a  most  sensational  character, 
and  the  reaction  of  these  events  upon  each  other,  of  nation 
upon  nation,  of  parts  of  nations  upon  other  parts,  was  to 
be  the  most  distinguishing  as  well  as  the  most  confusing 
characteristic  of  the  time. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

Central,  Europe  at  the  opening  of  1848  was  then  in  The  great 

a    restless,    disturbed,    expectant    state.       Everywhere    men  "^^  ."°.^^  ^^^ 

.  .  .  uprising, 

were  wearied  with  the  old  order  and  demanding  change.      A 

revolutionary  spirit  was  at  work,  the  public  mind  in  Ger- 
many, Italy,  and  Austria  was  excited.  Into  a  society  so 
perturbed  and  so  active  came  the  news  of  the  fall  of  Louis 
Philippe.  It  was  the  spark  that  set  the  world  in  conflagra- 
tion. The  news  was  received  with  joy  by  the  discontented 
everywhere,  who  by  it  were  themselves  nerved  to  resistless 
energy.  Revolution  succeeded  revolution  in  the  various 
countries  with  startling  rapidity.  The  whole  political  system 
of  conservatism  seemed  about  to  founder  utterly.  The  great 
mid-century  uprising  of  the  peoples  had  begun. 

The  storm-center  of  this  general  convulsion  proved  to  be  Vienna   the 

Vienna,  hitherto  the  proud  bulwark  of  the  established  order,  storm- 
.  .  center. 

Here  in  the  Austrian  Empire  one  of  the  most  confused  chap- 
ters in  European  history  began.  A  wild  welter  of  disintegra- 
ting forces  threatened  for  a  while  the  very  submersion  of  the 
Danubian  state.  The  movement  was  so  complicated  and 
intricate  that  to  give  a  clear  account  of  it  is  exceedingly 
difficult.  The  immediate  impulse  came  from  Hungary. 
There  the  Diet  had  been  in  session  since  1847,  engaged  in 
working  out  moderate  reforms  for  the  kingdom.     The  eff'ect  The  de- 

of  the  news  of  the  fall  of  Louis  Philippe  was  electrifying,  cisive  m- 
•  p    ^      ^  1   •  n       •  1,  tcrvention 

The  passion  or  the  hour  was  expressed  m  a  flaming  speech  ^^  Hungary. 

by  Kossuth,  who  proved  himself  a  consummate  spokesman 
for  a  people  in  revolt.  Of  impressive  presence,  and  endowed 
with  a  wonderful  voice,  he  was  revolutionary  oratory  in- 
carnate.    In  a  speech  in  the  Diet,  March  3,  1848,  he  voiced 

169 


170  CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

the  feelings  of  the  time,  and  seized  the  leadership  from  more 
moderate  men.  With  bitter  execration  he  fulminated  against 
the  Austrian  Government  as  a  charncl  house  whence  issued 
suffocating  vapors  and  pestilential  winds  benumbing  the 
senses,  deadening  the  national  spirit.  Only  with  a  free  con- 
stitution could  the  various  races  of  Austria  have  a  happy 
future  and  live  together  in  brotherhood.  The  effect  of  this 
speech  in  Hungary  and  throughout  the  Austrian  states  was 
immediate  and  profound.  Translated  into  German,  and 
published  in  Vienna,  it  inflamed  the  passions  of  the  people. 
Ten  days  later  a  riot  broke  out  in  Vienna  itself,  organized 
largely  by  students  and  workingmen.  The  soldiers  fired  and 
bloodshed  resulted.  Barricades  were  erected  and  the  people 
and  soldiers  fought  hand  to  hand.  The  crowd  surged  about 
and  into  the  imperial  palace,  and  invaded  the  hall  in  which 
The  over-      the  Diet  was  sitting,  crying  "  Down  with  Metternich !  "   Met- 

-  ^?^  °.  ^    temich,  who  for  thirty-nine  years  had  stood  at  the  head  of 
Hettemich.  j  j 

the  Austrian  states,  who  was  the  very  source  and  fount  of 

reaction,  imperturbable,  pitiless,  masterful,  was  now  forced 
to  resign,  to  flee  in  disguise  from  Austria  to  England,  to 
witness  his  whole  system  crash  completely  beneath  the  on- 
slaught of  the  very  forces  for  which  he  had  for  a  generation 
shown  contempt. 

The  effect  produced  by  the  announcement  of  Metternich's 
fall  was  prodigious.  It  was  the  most  astounding  piece  of 
news  Europe  had  received  since  Waterloo.  His  fall  was 
correctly  heralded  as  the  fall  of  a  system  hitherto  impreg- 
nable. 

As  Hungary,  under  the  spell  of  Kossuth's  oratory,  had 
exerted  an  influence  upon  Vienna,  so  now  the  actions  of  the 
Viennese    reacted    upon    Hungary.     The    Hungarian    Diet, 
dominated  by  the  reform  and  national  enthusiasm  just  un- 
The  Maxell    chained  and  constantly  fanned  by  Kossuth,  passed  on  March 
laws.  15th  and  the  days  succeeding  the  famous  March  Laws,  by 

which  the  process  of  reforming  and  modernizing  Hungary, 
which  had  been  going  on  for  some  years,  was  given  the  finish- 


THE  MARCH  LAWS  IN  HUNGARY  171 

ing  touch.  These  celebrated  laws  represented  the  demands  of 
the  Hungarian  national  party  led  by  Kossuth.  They  con- 
cerned two  great  subjects,  the  internal  reorganization  of 
Hungary  and  the  future  relations  of  that  kingdom  to  the 
empire  as  a  whole.  They  swept  away  the  old  aristocratic 
political  machinery  and  substituted  a  modern  democratic 
constitution.  Henceforth  there  was  to  be  a  Diet  meeting 
annually,  not  at  Presburg,  a  town  near  Austria,  but  at 
Budapest,  in  the  very  heart  of  the  kingdom,  a  Diet,  moreover, 
to  be  elected,  not  by  the  privileged  nobility  but  by  every 
Hungarian  owning  property  to  the  value  of  about  one 
hundred  and  fifty  dollars.  The  feudal  services  owed  the 
nobility  by  the  peasants  were  abolished,  and  nothing  was 
said  of  compensation,  save  that  it  was  a  "  debt  of  honor," 
presumably  to  be  discharged  by  the  nation  later.  Rehgious 
freedom,  liberty  of  the  press,  trial  by  jury,  a  national 
guard  were  all  proclaimed.  And  as  regards  the  relations 
of  Hungary  to  the  empire,  it  was  declared  that  Hungary 
should  henceforth  have  its  own  ministry,  not  only  for  domestic 
business,  but  also  for  war,  finance,  and  foreign  affairs. 
These  latter  departments  had  hitherto  belonged  to  the 
central  government.  The  March  laws  made  Hungary  prac-  Hungary 
tically  an  independent  nation.  The  only  connection  with  Practically 
Austria  was  in  the  person  of  the  monarch,  who  could  act  ^ 
in  Hungary,  however,  only  through  this  Hungarian  ministry. 
The  consent  of  the  Vienna  Government  was  all  that  was  now 
needed  to  complete  this  virtual  separation,  and  this  consent 
was  shortly  given  under  the  compulsion  of  dire  necessity 
(March  31).  Thus,  with  remarkable  swiftness  and  without 
bloodshed,  Hungary  had  practically  won  her  independence. 
Henceforth  she  would  be  mistress  of  her  own  destinies.  That 
she  so  understood  the  matter  was  shown  by  her  creation  of  a 
national  army  with  a  national  flag,  and  by  the  appointment 
of  Hungarian  ambassadors  to  foreign  countries. 

The  example  of  Hungary  was  speedily  followed  by  Bo-  Revolution 
hernia.      Here  there  were  two  races :  the  Germans,  wealthy,  ^  *™  ** 


172 


CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 


Revolution 

in  the 

Austrian 

provinces. 


Revolution 
in 

Lombardy- 
Venetia. 


educated,  but  a  minority,  and  the  Czechs,  poorer,  but  a 
majority,  ambitious  to  make  Bohemia  a  separate  state,  sub- 
ject only  to  the  emperor.  The  movement  for  the  revival 
of  Czechish  nationality  had  been  growing  since  1830,  ex- 
pressed particularly  by  the  revival  of  the  Czechish  language 
as  a  mark  of  distinction  from  the  German,  as  a  method  of 
spiritual  unification.  This  had  been  accompanied,  as  we 
have  seen,  by  a  revival  of  interest  in  Czechish  and  Slavic 
history.  The  Bohemians  now  sent  a  deputation  to  Vienna 
March  19th,  to  ask  for  the  complete  equality  of  Czechs  and 
Germans,  for  the  familiar  liberal  reforms  relating  to  the 
Diet,  the  press,  taxation,  and  religion,  and  for  local  auton- 
omy.  The  Emperor  a  few  days  later  conceded  most  of  these 
demands. 

Meanwhile,  recognizing  the  opportunity,  the  Liberals  of 
Vienna  and  the  Austrian  provinces  snatched  at  advantages 
for  themselves.  They  demanded  a  constitution  for  the  whole 
empire,  and  larger  local  self-government  for  the  Austrian 
provinces.  These  demands,  too,  were  granted,  of  course 
because  of  the  helplessness  of  the  Government.  That  help- 
lessness was  due  chiefly  to  the  critical  situation  in  Italy.  In 
Hungary,  Bohemia,  and  the  Austrian  provinces  extensive 
rights  in  the  direction  of  self-government,  of  constitutional 
reform,  of  personal  freedom,  had  been  won.  But  there  had 
in  no  case  been  a  repudiation  of  the  empire.  The  emperor's 
legitimate  headship  was  not  questioned.  But  in  Italy  it  was 
just  this  that  was  denied.  There,  Austria  possessed  the 
Lombardo- Venetian  kingdom.  The  leading  city  of  Lombardy 
was  Milan,  of  Venetia,  Venice.  These  states  had  long  re- 
sented Austrian  rule.  Moreover,  the  other  states  of  Italy 
had,  since  1815,  been  practically  dominated  by  Austria. 
In  the  peninsula  the  desire  to  expel  the  foreigner  completely, 
and  to  achieve  unity,  was  strong  and  growing.  This  is  an 
important  chapter  of  Italian  history,  which,  however,  can 
only  be  briefly  treated  here.  The  Italian  reformers  saw 
their  opportunity  in  the  disturbances  of  1848.     Milan  rose 


REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  173 

in  insurrection,  and  expelled  the  Austrian  troops,  which  were 

unprepared.     Venice,  under  tlie  Inspiring-  leadership  of  Daniel 

Manin,  threw  off  the  Austrian  allegiance  and  declared  itself 

a  republic  once  more.     Piedmont,  an  independent  state,  threw 

in  its  lot  with  these  rebels,  and  sent  its  army  into  Lombardy. 

The  other  Italian  states,  Tuscany,  the  Papacy,  and  Naples, 

being  compelled  thereto  by  the  popular  demand,  sent  troops 

forward    to    northern    Italy    to    co-operate.     The    moment 

seemed  to  have  arrived  for  the  liberation  of  the  peninsula  Italy 

from  Austrian  control.      The  peoples  and  governments   ap-  renounces 

All  stri  3.11 
peared  to  be  unanimous  in  their  determination  to  drive  out  ^qj^^j.^^ 

the  Austrians  once  for  all.  Italy  had  practically  declared 
its  independence.  Here,  then,  was  the  critical  point  that 
must  be  defended  at  all  costs.  Fortunately  for  Austria  she 
had  in  northern  Italy  a  commander  equal  to  the  task, 
Radetzky,  a  man  who  had  served  with  credit  in  every  Aus- 
trian war  for  sixty  years,  and  who  now  at  the  age  of  eighty- 
two  was  to  increase  his  reputation.  Radetzky,  forced 
out  of  Milan,  retired  to  the  famous  Quadrilateral,  the  fort- 
resses on  the  Adige  and  the  Mincio,  Legnago,  Peschiera, 
Verona  and  Mantua,  one  of  the  strongest  military  positions 
in  Europe.  Temporarily  on  the  defensive,  he  believed  he 
could  win  in  the  end  if  properly  supported.  He  succeeded 
in  convincing  the  Austrian  Government  that  the  crucial 
point  was  Italy,  that  here  the  fate  of  the  empire  would  be 
decided. 

Meanwhile,  there  were  March  days  in  Germany,  too.  Aus-  Revolution 
tria's  distress  was  Germany's  opportunity  as  it  was  Italy's. 
As  we  have  seen,  the  personality  and  system  of  Metternich 
had  imposed  themselves  upon  the  German  Confederation, 
and  through  it  upon  the  states  of  which  it  was  composed. 
The  news  of  his  fall  had  immediate  and  resounding  effect,  and 
particularly  in  Prussia,  for  months  kept  fevered  by  its 
struggle  with  Frederick  William  IV  for  a  real  parliament. 
On  March  15th  barricades  were  erected  in  Berlin  and  for  a 
week  the  capital  was  the  scene  of  great  turbulence  and  some 


174  CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

bloodshed.     The  King,  who  had  begun  to  waver  even  before 

the  outbreak,  issued  on  the  18th  a  proclamation  in  which  he 

summoned  the  United  Landtag  to  co-operate  in  framing  a 

constitution  for  the  realm,  guaranteeing  the  political  and  civil 

liberties  that  had  been  demanded  for  years.     He  also  promised 

to  lead  in  the  attempt  to  achieve  unity  for  Germany. 

^he  Por  the  moment  seemed  to  have  come  when  this,  also,  might 

^     be  wrung  out  of  the  chaos  of  the  times,  when  the  loose  con- 
movement.  ° 

federation  erected  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna  might  be  trans- 
formed into  a  strong  and  vigorous  union.  The  Liberals  had 
always  desired  this,  and  had  recently  become  unusually  active 
in  outlining  plans  and  preparing  for  the  future.  The  revolu- 
tion in  France  gave  them  encouragement.  The  fact  that 
Austria,  interested  in  the  preservation  of  the  old  Confedera- 
tion, was  now  impotent,  that  the  princes  everywhere  in  Ger- 
many were  powerless  to  oppose,  greatly  advanced  the  cause. 
A  self-constituted  committee  of  Liberals  met  at  Heidelberg 
early  in  March  and  decided  to  call  a  preliminary  assembly 
to  consider  the  whole  question.  This  preliminary  assembly, 
or  Vorparlament,  met  from  March  31st  to  April  4th  and 
arranged  for  the  election,  directly  by  the  people,  of  an 
assembly  that  should  draw  up  the  constitution  for  a  united 
Germany.  The  princes  of  the  different  states  were  forced 
to  sanction  this  proceeding,  as  was  also  the  Diet.  In  April 
The  Par-  and  May  the  elections  were  held,  and  on  May  18th  the  first 
liament  of  German  National  Assembly  or  Parliament  of  Prankfort  met 
amid  the  high  hopes  of  the  people. 

Thus  by  the  end  of  March  1848  revolution,  universal  in  its 
range,  was  everywhere  successful.     The  famous  March  Days 
had    demolished    the  system    of   government    that    had    held 
ipj^g  sway  in  Europe  for  a  generation.     Throughout  the  Austrian 

March  Empire,  in  Germany   and  in  Italy  the   revolution  was   tri- 

revolutions   umphant.     Hungary  and  Bohemia  had  obtained  sweeping  con- 
cessions;   a   constitution   had   been   promised   the  Austrian 
where  ^  ^         _ 

trium-  provinces ;  several  Italian  states  had  obtained  constitutions ; 

phant.  the  Lombardo-Venetian  kingdom  had  declared  itself  inde- 


the 


AUSTRIA  RECOVERS  LOST  GROUND        175 

pendent  of  Austria,  and  the  rest  of  Italy  was  moving  to  sup- 
port the  rebels ;  a  constitution  had  been  promised  Prussia, 
and  a  convention  was  about  to  meet  to  give  liberty  and  unity 
to  Germany. 

But  the  period  of  triumph  was  brief.     At  the  moment  of  Austria 

greatest    humiliation    Austria    began    to    show    remarkable    ^S^^^ 
^  .     °  .  .     work  of 

powers  of  recovery.     In  the  rivalries  of  her  races,  and  m  restoration. 

her  army  lay  her  salvation.  The  Government  won  its  first 
victory,  not  in  Italy,  which  was  the  critical  point,  but  in 
Bohemia.  There,  in  March,  the  Germans  and  the  Czechs 
had  worked  together  for  the  acquisition  of  the  reforms  de- 
scribed above.  But  shortly  serious  differences  drove  the  two 
races  apart.  The  Germans  wished  to  have  Bohemia  repre- 
sented in  the  Frankfort  Parliament,  and  included  within  the 
new  Germany  that  was  expected  to  issue  from  the  delibera- 
tions of  that  body.  To  this  the  Czechs,  however,  were 
strongly  opposed,  fearing  that  this  would  only  mean  the 
complete  submersion  of  their  own  nationality  in  that  of 
Germany,  the  Germans  being  overwhelmingly  predominant. 
What  they  aspired  to  was  ultimately  a  Czechish  or  Slavic 
kingdom  of  their  own.  Fearing  this  very  thing  the  Germans 
in  Bohemia  redoubled  their  efforts  to  make  the  connection 
between  Bohemia  and  Germany  close.  Racial  animosities 
were  thus  vigorously  fanned.  The  result  was  street  dis- 
turbances in  Prague  between  the  Germans  and  Czechs,  cul-  Bohemia 
minating  in  an  insurrection  June  12th.  Windischgratz,  conquered, 
commander  of  the  troops  in  Prague,  proclaimed  the  city  in 
a  state  of  siege.  Unable  to  restore  quiet  by  negotiation  he 
bombarded  the  city  on  the  17th,  soon  subdued  it  and  was 
dictator.  The  army  had  won  its  first  victory,  and  that,  too, 
by  taking  advantage  of  the  bitter  racial  antagonisms  in 
which  the  Austrian  Empire  so  abounded. 

In   Italy  also  the  army   was   victorious.     Radetzky   had  Italy 

correctly  foreseen  the  future.     The  Italians,  after  the  first  Partially 

.  ...      conquered, 

flush  of  enthusiasm,  began  to  be  torn  by  jealousies  and  dis- 
sensions.    The  Papal,  Neapolitan,  and  Tuscan  troops  were 


176 


CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 


Civil 

dissension 
within 
Hungary. 


recalled  and  northern  Italy  was  left  to  itself.  The  rulers 
of  those  states  had  sent  their  armies  forward  to  join  Piedmont 
in  the  war  with  Austria,  not  because  they  had  wished  to,  but 
because  of  popular  pressure  which  they  now  felt  able  to  defy. 
Charles  Albert  was  no  match  for  Radetzky,  and  was  defeated 
badly  at  Custozza,  July  25th.  Austria  recovered  Lombardy 
and  could  even  have  invaded  Piedmont  had  it  not  been  for 
the  opposition  of  France  and  Great  Britain.  Hostilities 
were  brought  to  a  close  by  an  armistice  August  9th.  By  the 
middle  of  the  summer  of  1848  the  Austrian  Government 
was  again  in  the  saddle  in  Bohemia,  and  had  partially  re- 
covered its  power  in  Italy.  But  in  Vienna  itself  and  in 
Hungary  its  position  was  still  most  precarious. 

Hungary,  as  we  have  seen,  had  won  by  the  March  Laws 
of  1848  a  position  of  practical  independence  of  Austria. 
It  possessed  its  own  ministry,  which  constituted  the  real 
government.  The  role  of  the  Emperor  was  most  circum- 
scribed, yet  he  was  forced  to  endure  this  humiliation  for 
the  present.  But  the  Austrian  ministry  was  only  biding  its 
time  to  humble  this  arrogant  Magyar  Government.  The 
opportunity  came  with  the  outbreak  of  civil  dissension  within 
Hungary  itself.  There  racial  and  national  rivalries  rose 
to  the  highest  pitch.  The  Magyars,  though  a  minority  of 
the  whole  people,  had  always  been  dominant  and  the  victory 
of  March  had  been  their  victory.  But  the  national  feeling 
was  strong  and  growing  with  Serbs,  Croatians,  and  Rou- 
manians. These,  in  the  summer  of  1848,  demanded  of  the 
Hungarian  Diet  much  the  same  privileges  which  the  Magyars 
had  won  for  themselves  from  the  Vienna  Government.  They 
wished  local  self-government  and  the  recognition  of  their 
own  languages  and  peculiar  customs.  To  this  the  Magyars 
would  not  for  a  moment  consent.  They  intended  that  there 
should  be  but  one  nationality  in  Hungary — that  of  the 
Magyars.  Individual  civil  equality  should  be  guaranteed 
to  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  kingdom  of  whatever  race, 
but  no  separate  or  partly  separate  nations,  and  no  other 


DISSENSIONS  WITHIN  HUNGARY  177 

official  language  than  their  own.  They,  therefore,  refused 
these  demands  point-blank.  As  a  consequence,  the  bitterest 
race  hatreds  broke  out  in  this  Hungarian  state,  whose  power 
liad  been  so  recently  established,  and  was  so  lightly  grounded. 
The  Magyars  insisted  that  the  Magyar  language  should 
be  taught  in  all  the  schools  in  Croatia  and  should  be  used 
in  all  official  communications  between  that  province  and  the 
central  government  in  Budapest.  The  Croatians  resented  The 
this  uncompromising  and  ungenerous  policy  and  their  resent-  . 
ment  rapidly  became  rebellion.  The  Austrian  Government  against  the 
appointed  Jellachich,  a  Croatian  colonel  and  a  bitter  oppo-  Magyars, 
nent  of  the  Magyars,  as  governor  or  ban  of  Croatia.  This  the 
Hungarians  felt  to  be  an  insult,  and  their  relations  with  the 
Vienna  Government  became  very  much  strained.  Jellachich 
labored  from  the  outset  to  fan  the  flames  of  this  hatred 
of  Croat  and  Magyar.  Would  the  Austrian  Government 
sanction  these  acts  of  one  of  its  subjects  against  Hungary.'' 
That  Government  had  approved  the  March  Laws  which  gave 
large  powers  to  Hungary,  and  Hungary  included  Croatia, 
Slavonia,  and  other  Slavic  areas.  The  Hungarian  Gov- 
ernment was  entirely  within  its  rights  when  it  demanded 
that  Jellachich  be  dismissed  and  that  the  agreement  of  March 
be  loyally  applied.  But  Austria  had  made  those  concessions 
only  from  compulsion.      It  saw  now  in  Jellachich  a  means  Austria 

of  recalling  them.      But  its  own  position  was  still  too  in-  ®f^  °^^       * 

®  .      .  ^  situation, 

secure    to    permit    it    to    proceed    openly    and    aboveboard 

to  that  direct  end.  The  policy  that  it  followed  was  most 
tortuous, — now  apparently  conceding  the  Hungarian  de- 
mands, at  the  same  time  not  discrediting  Jellachich.  It 
would  be  impossible  in  our  space  to  trace  these  manoeuvers 
in  detail.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  conduct  so  uncandid  in- 
creased daily  the  tension  between  Hungary  and  Austria, 
considered  by  Hungary  responsible  for  the  actions  of  Jella- 
chich. A  change  consequently  occurred  in  the  inner  politics 
of  Hungary,  which  was  resolved  to  maintain  itself  against 
the  rebellious  Slavs  and,  if  Austria  supported  them,  against 


178 


CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 


Radical 
party  in 
Hungary 
seizes 
control. 


Austria  itself.  The  Hungarian  ministry  since  March  had 
been  a  moderate  one,  in  favor  of  maintaining  peace.  It 
included  all  the  more  important  Magyar  statesmen.  But 
the  perilous  position  into  which  the  Magyars  were  drifting 
naturally  favored  the  more  warlike  and  revolutionary  leaders 
who  embodied  the  passionate  hatred  of  the  Slavs  and  Austrians. 
Peaceful  negotiation  between  the  various  parties  to  the  con- 
flict failed,  and  in  September  1848  matters  were  precipitated 
by  Jellachich,  who  began  a  civil  war  by  leading  an  army 
of  Croatians  and  Serbs  against  the  Magyars.  The  effect 
of  this  action  was  to  arouse  the  Magyars  to  a  fever  heat, 
and  to  play  directly  into  the  hands  of  the  aggressive  war 
party.  Kossuth  and  the  extreme  radicals  now  came  into 
power.  Those  who  stood  for  peaceful  relations  with  Austria, 
like  Deak,  gave  up  in  despair.  The  Austrian  Government 
finally  assumed  the  aggressive.  On  October  3d  the  Emperor 
declared  the  Hungarian  Diet  dissolved.  At  the  same  time 
Jellachich,  so  odious  to  all  Magyars,  was  given  the  command 
of  all  the  imperial  troops  in  Hungary.  The  immediate 
effect,  however,  of  this  action  was  not  what  had  been  in- 
tended, but  was  rather  another  outbreak  in  Vienna  itself. 
There  the  revolutionists,  sympathizing  with  the  Magyars, 
rose  and  actually  controlled  the  city  for  several  weeks.  The 
Emperor  fled  to  Olmiitz.  But  now  the  army  appeared  upon 
the  scene.  Windischgratz,  recalled  from  Prague,  besieged 
Vienna  for  five  days,  finally  forcing  its  surrender  October 
31,  1848.  Austria  had  won  her  third  victory ;  for  in  Bo- 
hemia, in  Italy,  and  now  in  Vienna  the  army  had  intervened 
with  decisive  effect  and  had  either  crushed  or  checked  the 
revolutionary  parties,  and  had  won  back  for  the  Government 
some  of  the  ground  lost  in  March. 

The  reactionary  party  in  Austria  now  became  stronger 
and  more  determined  to  finish  with  this  ubiquitous  revolution. 
It  forced  the  Emperor  Ferdinand  to  abdicate.  He  was  suc- 
ceeded December  2,  1848,  by  his  nephew,  Francis  Joseph  I, 
a  lad  of  eighteen,  who  is  still  the  Emperor  of  Austria  (1909). 


WAR  BETWEEN  AUSTRIA  AND  HUNGARY    179 

The  purpose  of  this  manoeuver  was   to  permit  by   a  show  Abdication 

of  Icffalitv  the  abrogation  of  the  March  Laws  in  Hungary.  °    *  ^ 

.       "^  .  .  1  •      .         Emperor    of 

Promises  made  by  Ferdinand,  it  was  held,  were  not  bmdmg  Austria. 

upon  his  successor,  and  the  promises  of  March  were  hence-  Accession 
forth  to  be  repudiated.       Schwarzenberg,  one  of  the  most  °^  Francis 
reckless,  daring,  and  autocratic  ministers  of  the  nineteenth 
century,   now   became   the    real   leader   of   the   Government. 
The  Austrian  ministry,  at  last  confident  of  its  power,  re- 
tracted the  March  Laws  and  prepared  to  subdue  Hungary 
as  it  had  subdued  Bohemia  and  Vienna.      Hungary  stiffened 
for  the  coming  conflict.       She  declared  Francis   Joseph   a  Hungary 
usurper.     Only  that  person  was  King  of  Hungary  who  had 
been  crowned  in  Hungary  with  the  crown  of  St.   Stephen.  Joseph  a 
She  therefore  refused  to  recognize  the  new   ruler  until  he  usurper, 
should  be  crowned  and  take  the  oath  to  the  constitution, 
and  she  held  that  Ferdinand  was  still  King,  and  prepared 
to  fight  in  his  defense  and  that  of  the  March  Laws  which 
he  had  sanctioned. 

Thus  it  came  about  that  the  year  1849  saw  a  great  war  War 

in  Hungary.      Austrian  armies  were  sent  into  that  country  ''6*^^®^ 

Austria  and 
from  various  directions.       The  ungenerous   conduct  of  the  Hungary. 

Magyars  toward  the  other  races  in  Hungary  was  now  given 
its  reward.      Not  only  did  the  Hungarian  armies  have  to 
face  Austrian  troops,  flushed  with  victory,  but  in  the  south 
the  Serbs  were  in   full  revolt,  in   the   east  the   Roumanian 
peasantry  favored  the  Austrians,  in  the  south  and  south- 
west    the     Croatians     and     Slavonians     under     Jellachich 
were  eager  for  revenge.      The  result  was  that  the  Hungarian 
armies  in  the  period  from  January  to  March  1849  were  in 
the  main  unsuccessful.   In  April,  however,  they  gained  several 
victories  and  drove  back  the  Austrians.      Then,  in  a  frenzy 
of  excitement,  the  Hungarian  radicals,  led  by  Kossuth,  in-  Hungarian 
duced  the  Diet  to  take  the  momentous  step  of  declaring  that  Declaration 
the  House  of  Hapsburg,  as  false  and  perjured,  had  ceased  °^   I^de- 
to  rule,  and  that  Hungary  was  an  independent  nation.     Kos-  a^-ji    14' 
suth  was  appointed  President  of  the  indivisible  state  of  Hun-  1849. 


180  CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

gary.  Wliilc  the  word  republic  was  not  uttered,  such  would 
probably  be  the  future  form  of  government  If  the  Hungarians 
succeeded  in  achieving  their  independence.  The  Hungarian 
victories  still  continued  for  a  while,  but  the  action  of  the 
Diet  in  declaring  independence  altered  the  situation  disas- 
trously. The  matter  became  international.  Foreign  inter- 
vention brought  this  turbulent  chapter  abniptly  to  a  close. 
The  young  Francis  Joseph  I  made  an  appeal  for  aid  to 
the  Tsar  of  Russia.  Nicholas  I  showed  the  greatest  alacrity 
in  responding.  The  reasons  that  determined  him  were  vari- 
ous. He  was  both  by  temperament  and  conviction  predis- 
posed to  aid  his  fellow-sovereigns  against  revolutionary 
movements  if  asked.  He  was  an  autocrat  and  interested  in 
the  preservation  of  autocracy  wherever  it  existed.  Also 
he  had  no  desire  to  see  a  great  republic  on  his  very  borders. 
Furthermore,  a  successful  Hungary  might  make  a  restless 
Poland.  Many  Poles  were  fighting  in  the  Hungarian  armies. 
Hungary  Russian  troops,  variously  estimated  at  from  100,000  to 

conquere  .  200,000,  now  poured  into  Hungary  from  the  east  and  north. 
The  Austrians  again  advanced  from  the  west.  The  Hun- 
garians fought  brilliantly  and  recklessly,  urged  on  by  the 
eloquence  of  Kossuth.  They  sought  the  aid  of  the  Turks 
but  did  not  receive  it.  They  even  appealed  to  the  Slavs, 
promising  them  in  adversity  the  rights  they  had  refused 
in  prosperity,  but  in  vain.  The  overwhelming  numbers  of 
their  opponents  rendered  the  struggle  hopeless.  Kossuth 
resigned  in  favor  of  Gorgei,  a  leading  general.  The  latter 
was  forced  to  capitulate  at  Vilagos,  August  13,  1849.  The 
war  of  Hungarian  Independence  was  over.  Kossuth  and 
others  fled  to  Turkey,  where  they  were  given  refuge.  Nich- 
olas proudly  handed  over  to  Francis  Joseph  his  troublesome 
Hungary,  which  Austria,  if  left  to  her  own  resources,  would 
probably  have  been  unable  to  conquer.  The  punishment 
meted  out  to  the  Hungarians  had  no  quality  of  mercy  in  it. 
Many  generals  and  civilians  were  hanged.  The  constitutional 
privileges  were  entirely  abolished.      Hungary  became  a  mere 


AUSTRIA  DEFEATS  PIEDMONT  181 

province  of  Austria,  and  was  crushed  beneath  the  iron  heel. 
The  catastrophe  of  1849  seemed  the  complete  annihilation 
of  that  country. 

Meanwhile  Italy  also  had  been  reconquered  by  the  revived  The 
military  power  of  Austria.  The  armistice  concluded  in  ^^  .  ^^^_ 
August  1848  between  Austria  and  Piedmont,  after  the  battle  pieted. 
of  Custozza,  lasted  seven  months,  during  which  time  diplo- 
macy was  vainly  attempting  to  effect  a  peace.  Austria 
crushed  Lombardy  as  never  before  beneath  a  harsh  military 
rule.  Charles  Albert  considered  himself  now  so  deeply 
pledged  to  deliver  Italy  that  he  resolved  to  reopen  the  war 
and  did  so  in  the  spring  of  1849.  But  his  chances  were 
much  poorer  than  in  1848.  During  those  months  absolutism 
in  its  severest  form  had  been  restored  in  Naples,  and  Naples 
consequently  would  send  no  aid ;  also  the  Pope  had  fled  from 
Rome,  his  prime  minister,  Rossi,  having  been  murdered,  and 
had  gone  to  Naples  as  the  guest  of  Ferdinand.  Rome  had 
been  declared  a  republic,  with  Mazzini  as  one  of  the  Trium- 
virs, as  the  executive  was  called.  Tuscany,  also,  had  been 
declared  a  republic,  the  Grand  Duke  having  likewise  taken 
refuge  with  Ferdinand  of  Naples.  Tuscany  and  Rome  were 
consequently  involved  in  such  internal  complications  that 
they  could  not  be  counted  on  in  a  renewal  of  the  war.  More- 
over, there  was  little  sympathy  between  the  republicans  of 
these  states  and  the  monarchists  of  Piedmont,  for  one  of 
the  causes  here,  as  everywhere,  of  Austrian  success  lay  in 
the  fact  that  the  revolutionists  were  divided  among  them- 
selves. When  Charles  Albert  took  the  field,  therefore,  in  Abdication 
1849  he  took  it  alone.  No  help  came  from  the  states  to  °^ 
the  south.  The  result  was  not  long  doubtful.  At  Novara,  jj^j^jg^t. 
March  23,  1849,  the  Sardinian  army  was  utterly  overthrown. 
The  King  himself  sought  death  on  the  battlefield,  but  in 
vain.  "  Even  death  has  cast  me  off,"  he  said.  Believing 
that  better  terms  could  be  made  for  his  country  if  another 
sovereign  were  on  the  throne,  he  abdicated  in  favor  of  his 
son,  Victor  Emmanuel  II,  whose  reign,  begun  in  the  darkest 


182 


CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 


Overthrow 
of  the 
Roman 
Republic. 


Fall  of 
Venice. 


adversity,  was  destined  to  be  glorious.  Passing  into  exile, 
Charles  Albert  died  a  few  months  later.  He  had  rendered, 
however,  a  great  service  to  his  house  and  to  Italy,  for  he 
had  shown  that  there  was  one  Italian  prince  who  was  willing 
to  risk  everything  for  the  national  cause.  He  had  enlisted 
the  interest  and  the  faith  of  the  Italians  in  the  Government 
of  Piedmont,  in  the  House  of  Savoy.  He  was  looked  upon  as 
a  martyr  to  the  national  cause. 

The  battle  of  Novara  was  followed  shortly  by  the  over- 
throw of  the  Florentine  Republic  and  the  restoration  of  the 
grand  duke  of  Tuscany.  But  the  restoration  of  the  Pope 
and  the  extinction  of  the  Roman  Republic  was  a  more 
difficult  task.  That  republic,  under  the  leadership  of  Maz- 
zini,  was  becoming  popular  with  the  former  subjects  of  the 
Pope,  and  would  no  doubt  have  lived  had  foreign  powers 
been  willing  to  let  it  alone.  But  they  were  not.  France,  believ- 
ing that  Austria  would  intervene  If  she  did  not,  and  wishing 
to  assert  something  like  a  balance  of  power  In  the  peninsula, 
decided  to  send  an  expedition  to  restore  the  Pope,  but  at 
the  same  time  to  preserve  the  free  institutions  that  had  re- 
cently been  won  by  the  Romans.  The  president  of  the  re- 
public, Louis  Bonaparte,  favored  this  for  personal  reasons. 
He  wished  to  win  the  favor  of  the  Catholics  and  conserva- 
tives of  France.  And  thus  France,  pledged  by  its  very  con- 
stitution "  never  to  employ  Its  forces  against  the  liberties  of 
another  people,"  went  to  work  to  destroy  a  sister  republic. 
It  should  be  said  that  the  true  Republicans  in  France  strove 
to  prevent  the  Government  from  embarking  upon  this  policy, 
but  In  vain.  At  first  the  French  were  repulsed,  but  then,  re- 
inforced and  far  superior  to  the  Romans,  they  began  a  siege 
of  the  city  which  lasted  about  three  weeks,  ending  in  its  cap- 
ture June  30,  1849. 

With  the  fall  of  Venice  before  the  Austrlans  in  August 
1849  this  chapter  of  Italian  history  closes.  The  hopes 
of  1848  had  withered  fast.  A  cruel  reaction  now  held  sway 
throughout  most  of  the  peninsula.      The  power  of  Austria 


THE  PARLIAMENT  OF  FRANKFORT        183 

was  restored,  greater  apparently  than  ever.  Piedmont  alone 
preserved  a  real  independence,  but  Piedmont  was  for  the 
time  being  crushed  beneath  the  burdens  of  a  disastrous  war 
and  a  humiliating  peace. 

Meanwhile  the  victories  of  the  Liberals  in  Germany  were  The  Par- 
being  succeeded  by  defeats.  There  hope  had  centered  in 
the  deliberations  of  the  Parliament  of  Frankfort,  consisting 
of  nearly  six  hundred  representatives,  elected  by  universal 
suffrage.  The  assembly  was  composed  of  many  able  men, 
but  it  possessed  only  a  moral  authority.  Though  its  exist- 
ence had  not  been  prevented  by  the  rulers  of  the  various 
states,  because  they  had  not  dared  to  oppose  what  the  people 
so  plainly  desired,  still  those  rulers  gave  it  no  positive  sup- 
port and  played  a  waiting  game,  hoping  to  be  able  to  pre- 
vent the  execution  of  any  decisions  unfavorable  to  them- 
selves. The  assembly  aspired  to  give  unity  and  a  constitu- 
tion to  Germany.  But  having  no  draft  ready  to  discuss, 
much  time  was  lost.  Debates  on  rather  abstract  questions, 
too,  which  might  better  have  been  postponed,  consumed  many 
weeks,  during  which  the  old  order  was  beginning  to  win  back 
its  old  position,  particularly  in  Austria.  Gradually,  how- 
ever, the  Constitution  was  elaborated.  It  reduced  con- 
siderably the  powers  of  the  several  rulers  and  created  a 
fairly  strong  federal  state.  Two  most  thorny  questions 
long  baffled  the  assembly:  what  territory  should  be  included 
in  the  new  Germany,  and  who  should  be  its  head.''  The 
difficulties  were  extreme  in  either  case.  They  lay  in  the 
fact  that  there  were  two  great  powers,  Austria  and  Prussia, 
the  fundamental  fact,  as  we  have  seen,  of  the  historical  evolu- 
tion of  Germany.  Any  decision  of  either  question  would  The 
probably  offend  one  or  the  other.      Austria  was  the  chief  ^^^ 

problem.  Should  she  be  admitted  into  the  new  union?  If 
so,  wholly  or  only  in  part.?  If  wholly,  that  would  mean 
that  millions  of  Italians,  Croatians,  Hungarians,  Poles, 
Roumanians  would  come  in,  would  participate  in  the  making 
of  the  laws.      It  would  mean,  too,  that  the  new  central  par- 


184. 


CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 


liament  would  have  to  legislate  for  a  most  motley  aggregation 
of  peoples.  Moreover,  the  empire  thus  created  would  be 
no  Germany,  but  a  nondescript.  Austria,  largely  non- 
German,  had  a  population  of  38,000,000.  The  rest  of 
Germany  would  number  only  about  32,000,000.  Austria 
would,  therefore,  have  an  absolute  majority  in  the  parlia- 
ment, and  the  actions  of  that  majority  might  be  determined 
by  the  desires  of  Hungarians  and  Slavs.  Obviously  such 
an  unity  would  be  a  mockery.  Moreover,  to  permit  such 
dissimilar  elements  to  live  together  the  loosest  confederation 
would  be  necessary,  and  Geraians  were  tired  of  loose  con- 
federations. On  the  other  hand,  to  admit  only  the  German 
provinces  of  Austria  would  be  to  break  up  the  unity  of 
Austria,  and  to  this  the  Austrian  Government  objected.  It 
was  finally  decided,  however,  to  include  those  provinces  only. 
The  boundaries  of  the  new  union  were  to  be  the  same  as  those 
of  the  German  Confederation. 

The  other  most  important  question  was  what  should  be 
the  form  of  the  new  government,  and  who  should  be  the 
executive.'*  Should  there  be  an  emperor  or  a  president  or 
a  board,  and,  if  an  emperor,  should  his  office  be  hereditary, 
or  for  life,  or  for  a  term  of  years?  Should  he  be  the 
ruler  of  Prussia  or  of  Austria,  or  should  first  one  and  then 
the  other  rule?  The  final  decision  was  that  Germany  should 
be  an  hereditary  empire,  and  on  March  28,  1849,  the  King 
of  Prussia  was  chosen  to  be  its  head.  Austria  announced 
curtly  that  it  "  would  neither  let  itself  be  expelled  from  the 
German  Confederation,  nor  let  its  German  provinces  be 
separated  from  the  indivisible  monarchy." 

The  center  of  interest  now  shifted  to  Berlin,  whither  a 
delegation  went  to  offer  to  Frederick  William  IV  the  imperial 
crown  of  a  united  Germany.  Would  he  accept  it?  If  he 
the  King  of  ^l^ould,  the  new  scheme  to  which  twenty-eight  minor  states 
Prussia.  had  already  assented  would  go  into  force,  though  it  might 
involve  a  war  with  Austria,  by  this  time  largely  recovered 
from  her  various  troubles.      Frederick  William  had  declared 


Leadership 
in 

Germany 
offered    to 


FAILURE  OF  THE  FRANKFORT  PARLIAMENT    185 

in  1847  that  he  was  willing  to  settle  the  German  question, 
"  with  Austria,  without  Austria,  yes,  if  need  be,  against 
Austria."  Now,  however,  he  was  in  a  very  different  mood. 
He  declined  the  offer  of  the  Frankfort  Parliament.  The 
reasons  were  varied.  Austria  protested  that  she  would  never 
accept  a  subordinate  position,  and  this  protest  alarmed  him. 
And  he  disliked  the  idea  of  receiving  a  crown  from  a  revolu- 
tionary assembly;  rather,  in  his  opinion,  ought  such  a  gift 
to  come  from  his  equals,  the  princes  of  Germany. 

Thus  the  two  great  German  powers,  Austria  and  Prussia,  Rejection 

reiected  the  work  of  the  Frankfort  Parliament.      Rebuffed  °^  *^*  ^  ^^ 

''  1  1  •  ■  1    ^ork  of  the 

in  such  high  quarters,  that  body  was  unable  to  mipose  its  work  prankfort 

upon  Germany,  and  it  finally  ended  its  existence  wretchedly.  Parliament. 

In  session  for  over  a  year  it  accomplished  nothing.     But  the 

responsibility  for  the  failure  of  Germans  to  achieve  a  real 

unity  in  1848  and  1849  rests  primarily  not  with  it,  but  with 

Prussia  and  Austria.      Its  failure,  however,  and  its  mistakes 

probably  made  it  easier  for  the  next  generation  to  solve 

the  problem. 

The  King  of  Prussia  now  attempted  to  form  a  union  along  The 

his  own  royal  lines.      This  brought  him  into  conflict,  how- 

.     .  .  .  1  .      tion  of 

ever,  with  Austria  in  1850,  which  peremptorily  ordered  hmi  oimiitz." 

to  abandon  his  schemes,  which  he  forthwith  did.  This  was 
the  famous  "  humiliation  of  Oimiitz."  Austria  then  de- 
manded that  the  old  German  Confederation  of  1815,  which 
had  been  suspended  in  1848,  be  revived  with  its  Diet  at 
Frankfort.      This  was  done  in  1851. 

The  permanent   results    of  this   mid-century   uprising   of  Results  of 
central  Europe  were  very  slight.      Everywhere  the  old  gov-    ^^   ^^^°  ^' 
emmehts  slipped  back  into  the  old  grooves  and  resumed  the  1348 
old  traditions.      Two  states,  however,  emerged  with  consti- 
tutions   which    they    kept,    Sardinia,    whose    Constitutional 
Statute  granted  by  Charles  Albert  on  March  4,  1848,  estab- 
lished a  real  constitutional  and  parliamentary  government, 
the  only  one  in  Italy,  and  Prussia,  whose  Constitution  issued 
by  the  King  in  its  final  form  in  1850  was  far  less  liberal,  yet 


"  humilia- 


186  CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  REVOLT 

sufficed  to  range  Prussia  among  the  constitutional  states 
of  Europe.  By  it  the  old  absolutism  of  the  state  was 
changed,  at  least  in  form.  There  was  henceforth  a  parlia- 
ment consisting  of  two  chambers.  In  one  respect  this  docu- 
ment was  a  bitter  disappointment  to  all  Liberals.  In  the 
March  days  of  1848  the  King  had  promised  universal  suf- 
frage, but  the  Constitution  as  finally  promulgated  rendered 
it  illusory.  It  established  a  system  unique  in  the  world. 
Universal  suffrage  was  not  withdrawn,  but  was  marvelously 
manipulated.  The  voters  were  divided  in  each  electoral 
district  throughout  Prussia  into  three  classes,  according  to 
wealth.  The  amount  of  taxes  paid  by  the  district  was 
divided  into  three  equal  parts.  Those  voters  who  paid  the 
first  third  were  grouped  into  one  class,  those,  more  numerous, 
who  paid  the  second  third  into  another  class,  those  who 
paid  the  remainder  into  still  another  class.  The  result 
was  that  a  few  very  rich  men  were  set  apart  by  themselves, 
the  less  rich  by  themselves,  and  the  poor  by  themselves. 
Each  of  these  three  groups,  voting  separately,  elected  an 
equal  number  of  delegates  to  a  convention,  which  convention 
chose  the  delegates  of  that  constituency  to  the  lower  house 
of  the  Prussian  Parliament.  Thus  in  every  electoral  as- 
sembly two-thirds  of  the  members  belonged  to  the  wealthy 
class.  There  was  no  chance  in  such  a  system  for  the  poor,  for 
the  masses.  This  system,  established  by  the  Constitution  of 
1850,  still  exists  in  Prussia.  It  gives  an  enormous  prepon- 
derance of  political  power  to  the  rich.  The  first  class  con- 
sists of  very  few  men,  in  some  districts  of  only  one ;  the  second 
class  is  sometimes  twenty  times  as  numerous ;  the  third 
sometimes  a  hundred,  or  even  a  thousand  times.  Thus 
though  every  man  twenty-five  years  of  age  has  the  suffrage, 
the  vote  of  a  single  rich  man  may  have  as  great  weight  as 
the  votes  of  a  thousand  workingmen. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE    SECOND    REPUBLIC    AND    THE    FOUNDING 
OF  THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 

THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 

The  Revolution  of  1848  in  France  was  extraordinarily  The  French 
swift,  entirely  unexpected,  and  extremely  radical.  "  Though  ^^°  ^  ^°^ 
the  February  Revolution,"  says  de  Tocqueville,  "  was  of  all 
our  revolutions  the  shortest  and  the  least  sanguinary,  yet 
far  more  than  any  other  it  filled  the  minds  and  hearts  of 
men  with  the  idea  and  feeling  of  its  omnipotence."  Be- 
ginning as  a  moderate  demand  for  a  larger  electorate,  it 
soon  passed  far  beyond  this  into  the  realm  of  the  new  and 
the  uncertain.  A  revolution  of  three  days,  it  was  made 
without  premeditation,  without  definite  plan  or  accredited 
leaders.  The  day  of  the  24th  of  February  was  made  memo- 
rable by  events  crowding  upon  each  other  with  irresistible 
pressure.  On  the  morning  of  that  day  there  was  no  public 
demand  for  a  republic ;  by  sunset  a  republic,  the  second 
in  the  history  of  France,  had  been  proclaimed.  This  spec- 
tacular outcome  was  the  one  least  imagined,  as  it  had  seemed 
for  the  past  few  years  that  the  republican  party  which  had 
so  troubled  Louis  Philippe's  early  years  as  king  was  now 
moribund.  Suddenly  under  the  pressure  of  circumstances 
it  awoke,  and,  though  the  party  of  a  small  Parisian  minority, 
it  won  the  triumphs  of  the  day  and  established  its  regime. 

The  Second  Republic  lasted  nominally  nearly  five  years,  Stages  in 
from  February  24,  1848,  to  December  2,   1852,  when  the  *!;«   history 
Second  Empire  was  proclaimed.       Practically,  however,  as  second 
we  shall  see,  it  came  to  an  end  one  year  earlier,  December  Republic. 
2,   1851.       During  this   period  the   state  was   administered 

187 


188 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


Two   ele- 
ments in 
the  Provi- 
sional   Gov- 
ernment. 


The 
Repub- 
licans. 


The 

Socialists. 


successively  by  the  Provisional  Government,  chosen  on  Feb- 
ruary S'lth,  and  remaining  in  power  for  about  ten  weeks,  then 
for  about  a  year  by  the  National  Constituent  Assembly, 
which  framed  the  Constitution  of  the  Republic,  and  then  by 
the  President  and  Legislative  Assembly,  created  by  this 
constitution.  The  liistory  of  the  Republic  was  to  be  a  very 
troubled  one. 

The  Provisional  Government  was  from  the  first  composed 
of  two  elements.  The  larger  number,  led  by  Lamartine,  were 
simply  Republicans,  desirous  of  a  republican  form  of  gov- 
ernment in  place  of  the  monarchical.  "  I  regard  the  repub- 
lican government,"  says  Lamartine,  "  that  is  to  say,  the 
government  of  peoples  by  their  own  reason  and  their  own 
will,  as  the  sole  aim  and  the  sole  end  of  the  great  civilizations, 
as  the  sole  means  of  realizing  the  great  general  truths  that 
a  people  desires  to  inaugurate  in  its  laws.  Other  forms 
of  government  are  states  of  tutelage,  confessions  of  the 
eternal  minority  of  peoples,  imperfections  in  the  sight  of 
philosophy,  humiliations  in  the  sight  of  history."  The 
other  element  of  the  Provisional  Government  was  represented 
by  Louis  Blanc,  Flocon,  Albest,  men  who  believed  in  a 
republic,  but  as  a  means  to  an  end,  and  that  end  a  social, 
economic  revolution ;  men  who  wished  primarily  to  improve 
the  condition  of  the  laboring  classes,  to  work  out  in  actual 
laws  and  institutions  the  socialistic  theories  propounded 
with  such  effectiveness  during  the  later  years  of  the  reign 
of  Louis  Philippe,  and  particularly  the  principles  repre- 
sented in  Louis  Blanc's  famous  phrase,  "  the  right  to  labor." 
What  these  men  most  desired  was  not  a  mere  political 
change,  but  a  thoroughgoing  reconstruction  of  society  in 
the  interest  of  the  largest  and  weakest  class,  the  poor,  the 
wage-earners.  Blanc's  conception  of  the  republic  he  thus 
expressed :  "  It  has  always  been  my  opinion  that  the  re- 
publican form  of  government  is  not  the  sole  object  to  be 
aimed  at,  even  by  politicians  of  the  republican  school,  if 
their  love  for  the  commonwealth  be  sincere  and  disinterested. 


LOUIS  BLANC  AND  THE  SOCIALISTS       189 

I  believed  then,  as  I  do  now,  that  the  chief  end  to  be  kept 

in  view  is  to  make  him  that  works  enjoy  the  fruits  of  his 

work ;  to  restore  to  the  dignity  of  human  nature  those  whom 

the  excess   of  poverty   degrades ;   to   enlighten   those   whose 

intelligence,  from  want  of  education,  is  but  a  dim,  vacillating 

lamp  in  the  midst  of  darkness ;  in  one  word,  to  enfranchise 

the  people,  by  endeavoring  to  abolish  this  double  slavery, 

ignorance  and  misery."  ^ 

Blanc  was  a  convinced  Socialist,  intelligent  and  thought-  I-ouis 

ful.       The  interests   of  the   working  classes   constituted,   in 

^  .  theories, 

his  opinion,  the  supreme  problem  of  government.      He  wished 

to  replace  private  property  by  public  property  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  greater  number.  He  would  do  this  by  co- 
operative societies.  Production  should  not  be  carried  on 
by  capitalists,  employing  laborers  for  wages  and  retaining 
profits  for  themselves.  The  laborers  should  manage  the 
various  industries  themselves,  reaping  whatever  rewards 
there  were.  To  start  these  co-operative  societies  the  aid 
of  the  state,  furnishing  capital,  would  be  necessary.  But 
in  the  end,  gradually  and  without  violence,  the  whole  proc- 
ess of  production  would  be  transferred  from  the  control 
of  the  few  to  that  of  the  many. 

A  scheme  so  novel  and  so  opposed  to  the  habits  and  in- 
stitutions of  the  ages  was  bound  to  be  misconceived  and 
misrepresented.  Believers  in  the  existing  order  would  de- 
nounce every  economic  change  as  robbery;  believers  in 
change  would  be  more  dominated  by  passion,  by  hatred 
of  the  rich,  by  a  desire  for  a  division  of  property,  than 
by  moderate  or  equitable  plans  of  economic  reform. 

The  Provisional  Government,  divided  as  it  was  into   So-  Achieve- 
cialists   and  Anti-Socialists,   ran   the  risk  of  all  coalitions,  ^^^^^   of 
that  of  being  reduced  to  impotence  by  internal  dissensions,  5^0^^!   Gov* 
as  was  to  be  immediately   shown.       Certain  great  reforms  ernment. 
were,  however,  carried  with  practical  unanimity.      The  death 

'■  Quotations  are  from  Dickinson,  Revolution  and  Reaction  in  Modern 
France,  pp.  176,  178. 


190  THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 

penalty  for  political  offenses  was  abolished.  Universal 
suffrage  was  proclaimed,  and  thus  political  power  passed 
suddenly  from  the  hands  of  about  two  hundred  thousand 
privileged  wealthy  persons  to  over  nine  million  electors. 
Negro  slavery  throughout  the  French  colonies  was  abol- 
ished, as  it  had  been  in  the  first  French  Revolution.  The 
freedom  of  the  press  was  established,  as  were  the  freedom  of 
public  meeting  and  association  and  the  right  of  all  citizens  to 
become  members  of  the  National  Guard.  The  results  were 
almost  instantaneous  and  completely  changed  the  character 
of  political  life  in  Paris.  Newspapers  and  party  pamphlets, 
sold  cheaply,  appeared  in  profusion,  expressing  the  most 
varied  and  in  many  cases  most  radical  ideas,  and  influencing 
far  greater  numbers  than  the  French  press  had  previously 
done.  Political  clubs,  similar  to  those  of  the  Revolution, 
were  opened  and  formed  additional  clearing-houses  for 
opinion  and  debate,  and  the  National  Guard  rose  in  a  few 
weeks  from  50,000  to  about  200,000.  In  other  words,  the 
masses  of  Parisian  workmen  now  had  weapons  in  the  hand, 
as  members  of  the  Guard,  and  means  of  self-expression  and 
propaganda  in  clubs  and  newspapers. 
The  Conflicts  between  the  two  great  currents  of  opinion  began 

question    of  ^^  ^^iq  very  day  of  the  proclamation  of  the  Republic.    Armed 
the  flag.  ,  .      .  ,  ,      TT>^    1     1     Tr-ii 

workmen   came   m  immense  numbers  to   the   Hotel   de    Ville 

and  demanded  that  henceforth  the  banner  of  France  should 
be  the  red  flag,  emblem  of  Socialism.  Lamartine  repelled 
this  demand  in  a  brilliant  speech.  "  You  desire,"  he  said, 
"  to  replace  a  revolution  marked  by  unanimity  and  frater- 
nity with  one  of  revenge  and  suffering.  You  demand  that 
the  Government  raise  as  a  sign  of  peace  the  standard  of 
war  to  the  bitter  end  among  citizens  of  the  same  country. 
Never  will  I  sign  such  a  decree.  I  will  repel  to  the  last 
moment  of  my  life  this  bloody  flag,  and  you  ought  to  reject 
it  more  than  I,  for  the  red  flag  has  never  been  borne  else- 
where than  around  the  Champ-de-Mars,  imbrued  with  the 
blood  of  the  people  in  1791  and  1793,  while  the  tricolor  has 


THE  LABOR  COMMISSION  191 

made  the  circuit  of  the  world  with  the  name,  the  glory,  and 
the  liberty  of  France."  Lamartine's  eloquence  was  over- 
whelming. The  workmen  themselves  stamped  upon  the  red 
flag. 


But  the  Government,  achieving  an  oratorical  victory,  saw 
itself  forced  to  yield  to  the  socialist  party  in  two  important 
respects.  On  motion  of  Louis  Blanc,  it  recognized  the 
so-called  "  right  to  labor."  It  promised  work  to  all  citi- 
zens, and  as  a  means  to  this  end  it  established,  against  its 
own  real  wishes,  the  famous  National  Workshops.  Blanc 
demanded  that  a  Ministry  of  Progress  be  established,  to 
organize  co-operative  associations  of  the  kind  which  he  had 
advocated.  But,  instead,  the  Government  established  a  Labor  The  labor 
Commission,  with  Blanc  at  its  head  and  with  its  place  of 
meeting  the  Luxembourg  Palace.  This  was  a  mere  debat 
ing  society,  a  body  to  investigate  economic  questions  and 
report  to  the  Government.  It  had  no  power  of  action, 
or  of  putting  its  opinions  into  execution.  Moreover,  by  re- 
moving Louis  Blanc  from  the  Hotel  de  Ville  to  another 
part  of  Paris,  the  Government  really  reduced  his  influence 
and  that  of  his  party.  Yet  this  Labor  Commission,  thus 
lamed  at  the  start,  set  loyally  to  work.  It  w^as  composed 
of  delegates  of  workingmen  representing  different  crafts, 
of  political  economists,  and  even  of  employers.  Declaring 
that  "  manual  labor  too  prolonged  ruins  the  health  of  the 
laborer,  and  by  preventing  the  cultivation  of  his  mind,  under- 
mines the  dignity  of  man,"  it  demanded  the  reduction  of 
the  working  day  from  eleven  to  ten  hours  in  Paris,  and 
from  twelve  to  eleven  throughout  the  country.  The  Pro- 
visional Government  then  decreed  this  change,  but  the  de- 
cree remained  a  dead  letter,  as  employers  ignored  it.  The 
Commission  persuaded  the  Government  to  abolish  the 
"  sweating  "  system.  It  also  acted  as  a  court  of  arbitra- 
tion in  certain  labor  disputes  with  some  measure  of  success. 
But  as  time  wore  on  it  became  imtated  over  its  general 
lack  of  achievement,  which  contrasted  so  lamentably  with 


192 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


The 

National 

Workshops 


Its  tlie  endless  hopes  it  had  aroused.      The  irritation  constantly 

deepened,  and  the  Commission  became  in  the  end  a  center  of 
much  inflammatory  talk.  Looked  to  for  leadership  by  tens 
of  thousands  of  workmen,  it  was  a  source  of  danger  to  the 
Government.  Deprived  of  all  modes  of  legal  action,  it  might 
become  the  seat  of  conspiracies  and  illegal  proceedings. 

The  National  Workshops,  too,  were  a  source  of  ultimate 
disappointment  to  those  who  had  looked  to  them  to  solve 
the  complex  labor  problems  of  the  modern  industrial  system. 
Conceded  by  the  Provisional  Government  against  its  will,  and 
to  gain  time,  that  Government  did  not  intend  that  they  should 
succeed.  Their  creation  was  intrusted  to  the  Minister  of 
Commerce,  Marie,  a  personal  enemy  of  Louis  Blanc,  who, 
according  to  his  own  admission,  was  willing  to  make  this 
experiment  in  order  to  render  the  latter  unpopular  and 
to  show  workingmen  the  fallacy  of  his  theories  of  pro- 
duction, and  the  dangers  of  such  theories  for  themselves. 
The  scheme  was  represented  as  Louis  Blanc's,  though  it 
was  denounced  by  him,  was  established  especially  to  dis- 
credit him,  and  was  a  veritable  travesty  of  his  ideas. 
Blanc  wished  to  have  every  man  practise  his  own  trade  in 
real  factories,  started  by  State  aid.  They  should  be  en- 
gaged in  productive  enterprises ;  moreover,  only  men  of 
good  character  should  be  permitted  to  join  these  associa- 
tions. Instead  of  this,  the  Government  simply  set  men  of 
the  most  varied  sorts — cobblers,  carpenters,  metal  workers, 
masons,  to  labor  upon  unproductive  tasks,  such  as  making 
excavations  for  public  works.  They  were  organized  in  a 
military  fasliion,  and  the  wages  were  uniform,  two  francs 
a  day. 
Their  rapid  It  was  properly  no  system  of  production  that  was  being 
growth.  tried,  but  a  system  of  relief  for  the  unemployed,  who  were 
very  numerous  owing  to  the  fact  that  many  factories  had 
had  to  close  because  of  the  general  disturbed  state  of  affairs. 
The  number  of  men  flocking  to  these  National  Workshops 
increased  alarmingly :  25,000  in  the  middle  of  March ;  66,000 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  193 

in  the  middle  of  April;  over  100,000  in  May.  As  there 
was  not  work  enough  for  all,  the  number  of  working  days 
was  reduced  for  each  man  to  two  a  week,  and  his  total 
wage  for  the  week  fixed  at  eight  francs.  The  result  was 
that  large  numbers  of  men  were  kept  idle  most  of  the  time, 
were  given  wretched  wages,  and  had  plenty  of  time  to  dis- 
cuss their  grievances.  They  furnished  excellent  material 
for  socialist  agitators.  This  experiment  wasted  the  public 
money,  accomplished  nothing  useful,  and  led  to  a  street 
war  of  the  most  appalling  kind. 

The  Provisional  Government  was,  as  the  name  signified,  The 

li  •■•  iji  J.1'-      National 

only  a  temporary  organization  whose  duty  was  to  adminis- 

ter  the  state  until  an  assembly  should  be  elected  by  the  Assembly, 
new  universal  suffrage,  which  assembly  should  then  frame 
a  Constitution.  The  elections  were  held  April  23d,  and  the 
National  Constituent  Assembly  met  on  May  4,  1848.  The 
assembly  consisted  of  nine  hundred  men,  about  eight  hun- 
dred of  them  moderate  Republicans.  The  Socialists  had 
almost  disappeared. 

The  Assembly  showed  at  once  that  it  was  bitterly  opposed  The 

to  the  opinions  of  the  Socialists  of  Paris.      The  Provisional     ^^^^    ^ 

.  .  hostile 

Government  now  laid  down  its   powers,   and  the  Assembly  ^q  ^j^g 

chose  five  of  its  members,  all  Anti-Socialists,  with  Lamartine  SocialistSc 
as  the  head,  as  the  new  executive  until  the  Constitution  should 
be  drawn  up.  All  these  men  had  been  opposed  to  Louis 
Blanc.  The  Assembly  also  refused  to  create  the  Ministry 
of  Labor  demanded  by  the  latter.  The  workingmen  of  Paris, 
irritated  at  this  refusal  and  at  the  outcome  of  the  elections, 
and  seeing  that  they  had  nothing  to  hope  for  from  this 
Assembly,  rose  in  insurrection,  endeavoring  to  accomplish 
a  new  revolution  which  should  bring  in  the  socialistic  state 
as  that  of  February  had  brought  in  the  republican  demo- 
cratic. On  May  15th  they  invaded  the  Chamber,  drove  out 
the  representatives,  and  declared  the  Assembly  dissolved 
and  proclaimed  a  new  Provisional  Government  of  their  own. 
'But  their  victory  was   short-lived.       The  National  Guard 


194  THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 

came  to  tlic  rescue  of  the  Assembly,  and  some  of  the  leaders 
of  the  insurgents  were  made  prisoners. 
Abolition  ^\^q  Assembly,   irritated   in   turn   by   the   humiliation   to 

N  ti  nal  ^vhich  it  had  been  subjected,  resolved  to  root  out  the  great 
Workshops,  source  of  danger,  the  National  Workshops.  The  Govern- 
ment announced  their  immediate  abolition,  giving  the  work- 
men the  alternative  of  enrolling  in  the  army  or  going  into 
the  country  to  labor  on  public  works.  If  they  did  not 
leave  voluntarily,  they  would  be  forced  to  leave.  The  laborers, 
goaded  to  desperation,  prepared  to  resist  and  to  overthrow 
this  Government  which  they  had  helped  bring  into  existence, 
and  which  had  proved  so  unsympathetic.  Organized  as  a 
semi-military  force,  angered  at  the  hostility  of  the  bourgeois 
to  all  helpful  social  reform  that  could  make  their  Hves  easier, 
they  began  a  bitter  fight.  The  Assembly  saw  the  terrible 
nature  of  the  conflict  impending.  General  Cavaignac  was 
given  dictatorial  powers  by  the  Assembly,  the  executive  com- 
The  June  mission  of  five  resigning.  During  four  June  days  (June 
Days.  23-26,  1848)  the  most  fearful  street  fighting  Paris  had  ever 

known  went  on  behind  a  baffling  network  of  barricades.  The 
issue  was  long  doubtful,  but  finally  the  insurgents  were  put 
down.  The  cost  was  terrible.  Ten  thousand  were  killed  or 
wounded.  Eleven  thousand  prisoners  were  taken,  and  their 
deportation  was  immediately  decreed  by  the  Assembly. 
The  June  Days  left  among  the  poor  an  enduring  legacy 
of  hatred  toward  the  bourgeoisie. 
A  military  'pj^g  republic  of  order  had  definitely  triumphed  over  the 
-  .  socialistic  agitation.      But  so  narrow  had  been  its  escape, 

so  fearful  was  it  with  anxiety  for  the  future  that  the  dic- 
tatorship of  Cavaignac  was  continued  until  the  end  of  Octo- 
ber. Thus  the  Second  Republic,  proclaimed  in  February 
1848,  after  ten  troubled  weeks  under  a  Provisional  Govern- 
ment, passed  under  military  leadership  for  the  next  four 
months.      One-man  power  was  rapidly  emerging. 

The  results  of  this  socialist  agitation  and  of  the  sangui- 
nary days  of  June  were  lamentable  and  far-reaching.     They 


UNPOPULARITY  OF  THE  REPUBLIC        195 

greatly  contributed  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Republic.    Many 
of  the  bourgeois  had  during  these  months  experienced  the 
most   acute   financial   distress.       Many   manufacturers    and 
merchants  were  ruined  by  the  economic  crisis  created  by  the 
disturbed  state  of  affairs.      Bonds  depreciated  in  two  months  Growing 
from   116  francs   to  50,  with  the  result  that  fortunes  in-  °^^.*!f^  ^°^ 
vested  in  these  securities  were  suddenly  cut  in  two.     Their  aepublic. 
holders  became  enemies  to  the  Republic,  because  they  wished 
above  everything  a  government  of  order,  under  which  alone 
business  could  flourish  and  property  be  secure.     This  class 
was  very  influential. 

The  peasants  also  turned  against  the  Republic.  They 
were  told  that  the  Socialists  were  going  to  take  their  lands 
from  them  and  divide  them.  They  were  as  strongly 
attached  to  the  principle  of  private  property  as  were  the 
rich,  and  for  the  same  reason  desired  a  government  of  order. 
But  more  important,  because  alienating  the  peasants  from 
the  Republic,  was  the  action  of  the  Provisional  Government 
in  levying  a  new  tax. 

The  financial  situation  of  France  at  the  close  of  the  July 
Monarchy  was  unsatisfactory,  and  was  rendered  worse  by 
the  Revolution,  which  caused  widespread  business  uncer- 
tainty, undermined  credit,  and  made  the  collection  of  taxes 
difficult.  Bankruptcy  was  not  to  be  thought  of,  as  the 
Government  did  not  wish  to  have  the  Second  Republic  mean, 
in  the  opinion  of  mankind,  the  repudiation  of  debts,  as  had 
the  First.  On  the  other  hand,  no  new  loan  could  be  raised. 
The  Government,  therefore,  did  the  only  thing  it  could  do ;  An 

it  increased  the  direct  taxes  by  almost  one-half  ( forty-five  ^^P°P)^  f^ 

''  .  .  .    financial 

centimes  supplementary  to  each  franc  hitherto  paid).      This  measurco 

fell  not  only  upon  the  middle  class,  but  also  upon  the  peas- 
ants. Nothing  could  have  been  more  disastrous  for  the 
Republic,  which  thus  lost  its  popularity  with  the  most  numer- 
ous class.  If  the  Republic  meant  increased  taxes,  it  was, 
in  their  opinion,  inferior  to  monarchy.  The  effect  of  this 
tax  was  shown  more  clearly  later.      It  had  had  but  a  small 


196 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


The 

framing:  of 
the  Consti- 
tution. 


The   powers 
of  the 
executive. 


Discussion 
concerning 
the  presi- 
dency. 


influence  upon  tlie  elections  for  the  Constituent  Assembly, 
not  being  widely  known. 

After  the  suppression  of  the  Socialists  in  June  the  As- 
sembly proceeded  to  frame  the  Constitution,  for  which  task 
it  had  been  chosen.  It  proclaimed  the  Republic  as  the 
definitive  government  of  France.  It  declared  universal  suf- 
frage. It  provided  that  there  should  be  a  legislature  con- 
sisting of  a  single  chamber.  A  second  chamber  seemed 
aristocratic,  and,  moreover,  likely  to  be  a  check  upon  the 
first,  that  is,  upon  the  people  seeking  to  legislate,  and 
therefore  was  rejected.  The  Assembly  was  to  consist  of 
750  members,  chosen  for  three  years,  to  be  renewed  in  full 
at  the  end  of  that  period. 

The  executive  was  to  be  a  President  of  the  Republic  elected 
for  four  years  and  ineligible  for  re-election  save  after  a 
four  years'  interval.  He  was  given  very  considerable  pow- 
ers. It  was  felt  that  the  danger  in  giving  him  these  would 
be  neutralized  by  the  shortness  of  his  term  and  by  his  inability 
to  be  immediately  re-elected.  He  was  given  the  right  to 
propose  legislation  to  the  Assembly,  to  "  dispose  of  the  armed 
force,"  to  negotiate  and  ratify  treaties,  though  these  should 
become  binding  only  when  sanctioned  by  the  Assembly,  to 
appoint  and  dismiss  ministers  and  other  officials,  civil  and 
military.  The  President  therefore  was  to  be  a  person  of 
power.  How  he  should  be  chosen  was  the  most  important  ques- 
tion before  the  Constituent  Assembly,  and  was  long  debated. 
The  Assembly,  dominated  by  its  fundamental  dogma  of  uni- 
versal suffrage  and  popular  sovereignty,  was  disposed  to 
have  the  President  chosen  by  all  the  voters.  The  danger 
in  this  procedure  lay  in  the  lack  of  political  experience  of 
the  French  electorate,  and  the  probabilit}'  that  they  would 
be  blinded  by  some  distinguished  or  famous  name  in  making 
their  choice,  not  guided  by  an  intelligent  analysis  of  char- 
acter and  of  fitness  for  the  high  office.  Moreover,  if  the 
people  should  choose  both  the  legislature  and  the  President, 
they  would  create  two  co-ordinate  authorities,  likely  to  dis- 


MODE  OF  ELECTING  THE  PRESIDENT     197 

agree,  and  in  that  case  with  the  chance  of  victory  resting 
with  the  President,  a  single  individual,  knowing  his  own 
mind,  acting  directly  and  swiftly,  rather  than  with  the 
legislature  divided  into  parties,  and  necessarily  acting 
slowly.  This  likelihood  that  the  President,  wielding  the 
military  and  civil  power,  might  overturn  the  Republic  and 
make  himself  a  despot,  was  distinctly  foreseen  by  some  mem- 
bers, who  explicitly  warned  the  Assembly  against  it,  notably 
by  Jules  Grevy,  later  a  President  of  the  Third  Republic, 
who  urged  that  the  President  be  chosen  by  the  legislature 
and  that  he  be  removable  at  any  time  by  it.  Thus  Par- 
liament would  be  the  supreme  body  in  the  state,  not  simply 
a  co-ordinate  and  rival  power,  and  presidential  usur-  The 
pations  would  be  impossible.  "Are  you  quite  sure,"  said  ^^^  ^" 
Grevy,  "  that  in  that  series  of  men  who  are  to  succeed  each  chosen  by 
other  every  four  years  to  the  presidential  throne,  there  will  universal 
be  only  devoted  republicans  anxious  to  descend  from  it?  suffrage. 
Are  you  sure  that  there  will  never  be  any  one  sufficiently 
ambitious  to  try  to  perpetuate  his  power.?  .  .  .  And  if  this 
man  is  a  member  of  one  of  those  families  which  have  ruled 
over  France,  if  he  has  never  expressly  renounced  what  he 
calls  his  rights,  if  commerce  is  languishing,  if  the  people 
are  suffering,  if  they  are  passing  through  one  of  those  crises 
in  which  misery  and  deception  deliver  them  over  to  those  who 
conceal  by  promises  their  projects  against  liberty;  will  you 
guarantee  that  this  man  of  ambition  will  not  succeed  in  over- 
throwing the  Republic?"  Events  were  shortly  to  prove 
Grevy's  clear  right  to  the  title  of  prophet,  but  his  proposi- 
tion was  now  voted  down  overwhelmingly.  "  Something 
must  be  left  to  Providence,"  answered  Lamartine.  Another 
amendment  was  suggested  that  at  least  no  member  of  any 
of  the  families  which  had  ruled  France  should  ever  be 
chosen  President.  This,  too,  for  doctrinaire  reasons,  and 
because  it  seemed  to  limit  the  national  sovereignty,  was 
voted  down,  and  it  was  definitely  decided  that  the  people 
should     choose     the     President     and     should     be     entirely 


198 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


The    voters 
to  be  un- 
trammeled 
in  their 
choice. 


lOTiis 
Napoleon 
Bonaparte's 
opportunity. 


untrammeled  in  their  choice.  Thus  in  the  very  act  of 
drawing  up  a  Constitution  for  the  Second  Republic, 
the  Assembly  rendered  easy,  if  not  inevitable,  its  over- 
throw. 

Though  the  Republicans  of  1848  committed  many  grave 
errors,  owing  partially  to  their  inexperience,  partially  to 
their  indisposition  to  abate  any  of  their  traditional  political 
principles  in  the  face  of  the  extraordinary  exigencies  of 
a  tumultuous  and  turbulent  year,  yet  their  work  had  certain 
consequences  destined  to  survive.  For  fifty  years  the  Re- 
public had  been  associated  in  the  minds  of  multitudes  of 
Frenchmen  with  the  Reign  of  Terror,  had  signified  violence, 
disorder,  and  confiscation  of  property.  It  now  became  evident 
that  it  might  mean  something  very  different,  for  here  was  a 
Republic  which  suppressed  insurrection  and  restored  order 
•with  a  resolution  and  thoroughness  that  the  monarchy  had 
not  shown  under  Charles  X  or  Louis  Philippe,  one,  more- 
over, which  preferred  unpopularity  to  bankruptcy.  The 
June  Days  and  the  tax  of  the  forty-five  centimes  were  direct 
causes  of  its  downfall.  Yet  by  them  the  Republic  as  an  ideal 
of  government  ultimately  gained  strength,  though  the  present 
experiment  proved  ephemeral  and  weak. 

For,  in  leaving  the  choice  of  the  President  to  universal 
suffrage,  this  republican  assembly  was  playing  directly  into 
the  hands  of  a  pretender  to  a  throne,  of  a  man  who  believed 
he  had  the  right  to  rule  France  by  reason  of  his  birth,  Louis 
Napoleon  Bonaparte,  nephew  of  the  Great  Napoleon  and 
legitimate  heir  to  his  pretensions.  At  the  time  of  the  Feb- 
ruary Revolution  this  man  was  practically  without  influence 
or  significance,  but  so  swiftly  did  events  move  and  opinion 
shift  in  that  year  1848  that  by  the  time  the  mode  of  choos- 
ing the  President  was  decided  upon,  he  was  already  known 
to  be  a  leading  candidate,  a  fact  that  stamped  that  decision 
as  all  the  more  foolhardy. 

Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte  had  become  chief  of  the  house 
of  Bonaparte  in  1832  at  the  age  of  twenty-four.      He  con- 


LOUIS  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE     199 

ceived  his  position   with  utmost  seriousness.      He  believed  His 

that  he  had  a  riffht  to  rule  over  France,  and  that  the  day  P"^^®^^ 

°  .  .  career, 

would  come  when  he  would.      He  adhered  to  this  belief  for 

sixteen  years,  though  those  years  brought  him  no  practical 
encouragement,  but  only  the  reverse.  Gathering  about  him 
a  few  adventurers,  he  attempted  in  1836,  at  Strasburg,  and 
in  1840  at  Boulogne,  to  seize  power.  Both  attempts,  already 
described,  were  puerile  in  their  conception,  and  were  bun- 
glingly  executed.  Both  ended  in  fiasco.  He  had  gained  the 
name  of  being  ridiculous,  a  thing  exceedingly  difficult  for 
Frenchmen  to  forgive  or  forget.  As  a  result  of  the  former 
attempt  he  had  been  exiled  to  the  United  States,  from  which 
he  shortly  returned.  As  a  result  of  the  latter  he  was  im- 
prisoned in  the  fortress  of  Ham  in  northern  France,  from 
which  he  escaped  in  1846,  disguised  as  an  ordinary  mason, 
named  Badinguet.  He  then  went  to  England  and  in 
1848,  at  the  time  of  the  Chartist  risings,  he  was  a 
special  constable  stationed  in  Trafalgar  Square.  This 
was  certainly  no  record  of  achievement.  But  the  stars 
in  their  courses  were  fighting  for  him.  The  Revolution 
of  1848  created  his  opportunity,  as  that  of  1789  had 
created  that  of  the  First  Napoleon.  Like  his  great  pro- 
totype, whom  he  constantly  sought  to  imitate,  he  offered 
his  services  to  the  Republic.      He  was  elected  a  member  of  A  member 

the  Constituent  Assembly,  where  the  impression  he  created  „ 

•^  ,  .   ^  .  Constituent 

was  that  of  a  mediocre  man,  with  few  ideas  of  his  own,  who  Assembly. 

could  probably  be  controlled  by  others.  His  name,  how- 
ever, was  a  name  to  conjure  with.  This  was  his  only  capital, 
but  it  was  sufficient.  The  word  Napoleon  was  seen  to  be 
a  marvelous  vote-winner  with  the  peasants,  who,  now  that 
universal  suffrage  was  the  law  of  the  land,  formed  the  great 
majority.  "  How  should  I  not  vote  for  this  gentleman," 
said  a  peasant  to  Montalembert,  "  I  whose  nose  was  frozen 

at  Moscow?"      Louis  Napoleon  was  an  avowed  candidate  A  candidate 

for  the 
for  the  presidency,  and,  as  the  most  colorless,  was  the  stron-  ^-gsjjgncv 

gest.      Cavaignac  was  the  candidate  of  the  democratic  Re- 


200 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


publicans,  who  had  governed  France  since  February,  but 
he  was  not  popular,  and,  moreover,  he  was  hated  by  the 
workingmen  for  his  part  in  the  June  Days.  Ledru-Rollin 
was  the  candidate  of  the  Socialists,  an  aggressive  party,  but 
made  odious  to  law-abiding  citizens  by  the  events  of  the 
year,  and  always  in  the  great  minority.  Lamartine  was 
also  a  candidate.  His  sun  had  mounted  swiftly  to  full 
meridian  splendor  in  February,  but  was  as  swiftly  paling. 
Moreover,  the  parties  opposed  to  the  very  idea  of  a  republic 
now  rallied  about  Louis  Napoleon — the  Legitimists  and  the 
Orleanists,  as  they  preferred  even  an  Empire  to  a  Republic, 
an  unknown  man  who  seemed  pliable  to  a  man  known  for 
firmness,  rigidity,  and  strenuous  republicanism,  as  was  Ca- 
vaignac.  Moreover,  the  enigmatic  candidate  was  most  pro- 
fuse in  pleasing  promises  to  various  groups.     There  were 

Causes    of     other  causes   for  Louis   Napoleon's    overwhelming  triumph. 

his  triumph  The  Republic  had  been  proclaimed  by -a  faction  in  Paris,  and 
had  never  been  formally  approved  b}'^  France.  It  was  as- 
sociated in  the  minds  of  men  with  grave  uncertainty  as 
to  rights,  of  property,  rights  to  which  the  French  have 
always  held  tenaciously.  Louis  Napoleon,  by  his  profes- 
sions and  his  family  traditions,  seemed  to  stand  for  order 
and  stability.  Again,  for  many  years  a  series  of  brilliant 
writers  had  been  portraying  in  history  and  in  poetry  the 
wonders  of  the  Napoleonic  era.  Men's  actual  knowledge 
of  the  evils  and  oppressions  of  that  era  was  growing  less 
as  the  older  generation,  which  could  have  told  the  true  tale, 
was  disappearing,  and  a  new  Napoleonic  legend,  fair,  thril- 
ling, and  altogether  admirable  had  grown  up.  It  mattered 
little  that  this  legend  was  vitiated  through  and  through 
by  mendacity  and  distortion  of  history. 

For  these  reasons,  when  the  presidential  election  of  De- 
cember 1848  occurred,  Louis  Napoleon  was  found  to  be 
overwhelmingly  the  elect  of  the  people.  He  had  over  5,400,- 
000  votes,  while  Cavaignac,  his  nearest  competitor,  had  less 
than  1,500,000,  Ledru-Rollin  370,000,  and  Lamartine  less 


Louis 

Napoleon 

elected 

President 

Dec.  10, 

1848. 


THE  PRESIDENT  AND  THE  ASSEMBLIES      201 

than  18,000.  The  new  President  entered  upon  his  duties 
December  20,  1848.  On  that  day  before  the  Assembly  he 
swore  "  to  remain  faithful  to  the  democratic  republic,"  and 
said :  "  My  duty  is  clear.  I  will  fulfil  it  as  a  man  of  honor. 
I  shall  regard  as  enemies  of  the  country  all  those  who  en- 
deavor to  change  by  illegal  means  that  which  France  has 
established." 

The  French  had  thus  selected  a  Prince  as  President,  an  ^^® 
innovation  in  the  art  of  government.  In  the  following  May  ^gggj^ijiy 
they  did  an  equally  astonishing  thing  in  the  election  of 
a  Legislative  Assembly.  This  Assembly  of  750  members  con- 
tained about  500  Monarchists,  who  were  divided  into  Legiti- 
mists, Orleanists,  and  a  few  Bonapartists ;  about  70  mod- 
erate Republicans  of  the  kind  that  had  thus  far  controlled 
the?  Republic,  and  about  180  Socialists.  Thus  the  first 
legislature  elected  under  the  new  Constitution  of  the  Republic 
was  overwhelmingly  monarchical.  Only  70  could  be  held 
to  be  sincerely  attached  to  the  present  form  of  government. 
The  explanation  of  this  remarkable  result  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  Days  of  June  were  still  very  vivid  in  men's  minds. 
The  mass  of  Frenchmen  voted  for  monarchical  candidates 
because  they  believed  that  the  Republic  was  dangerous  to 
order  and  property. 

Thus  both  the  President  and  the  majority  of  the  Assembly  President 

were,  by  reason  of  their  very  beinff,  enemies   of  the  Con-  *^       ssem- 

.       .  .  .T  &»  ^         ^  Ijjy    opposed 

stitution  under  which  they  were  elected.      The  situation  was  ^^  ^^^  qqj^_ 

one  that  could  not  permanently  endure.      The  three  years  stitution. 

that  elapsed  between  the  inauguration  of  the  President  and 

the   coup   d'etat   of    1851,   which   virtually   ushered    in   the 

Empire,  though  it  was  not  formally  proclaimed  until  a  year 

later,  were  a  period  not   of  legislative   and   social   reform, 

but  of  adroit  and  tortuous  factional  politics,  played  not  for 

the  advancement  of  France,  but  for  the  advantage  of  party. 

Not  particularly  instructive,  a  brief  treatment  of  them  will 

suffice. 

At  first  the  President  and  the  monarchical  majority  co- 


202 


THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 


They    com- 
bine  to 
crush  the 
Repub- 
licans. 


The 

Franchise 
Law  of 
1850. 


operated  against  the  republican  party,  which  each  felt  to 
be  the  real  enemy.  Opportunities  for  doing  tliis  were  not 
slow  in  presenting  themselves.  Some  of  the  Republicans 
unwisely  attempted  an  insurrection  against  the  Government, 
June  13,  1849.  This  was  easily  put  down.  Following  up 
their  victory,  the  authorities  proceeded  to  cripple  the  Oppo- 
sition severely.  Thirty-three  of  their  representatives  were 
arrested  and  deprived  of  their  seats  in  the  Legislative  As- 
sembly. Their  journals  were  suppressed.  Public  meetings 
were  forbidden  for  a  year,  an  order  renewed  several  times 
later.  As  school-teachers  had  been  effective  friends  of 
the  Republic  all  over  France,  education  was  largely  reorgan- 
ized with  a  view  of  bringing  it  more  closely  under  the  control 
of  the  clergy,  friends  of  monarchy.  Paris  was  declared 
under  martial  law,  which  gave  greater  actual  power  than  ever 
to  the  President. 

This  removal  of  the  republican  leaders  rendered  easy  the 
passage  of  further  repressive  legislation.  The  Assembly 
next  enacted  the  Franchise  Law  of  1850.  This  provided 
that  to  be  a  voter  one  must  have  resided  in  a  given  commune 
for  three  years,  and  that  that  fact  must  be  proved  by  the 
presence  of  one's  name  on  the  tax  list.  This  law  virtually 
abolished  universal  suffrage  and  re-established  in  a  round- 
about way  a  property  qualification.  It  deprived  over  three 
million  workingmen,  one-third  of  the  electorate,  of  the  suf- 
frage, either  because  they  paid  no  taxes  or  because  to  get 
work  they  had  frequently  to  change  their  residence  and 
could  not,  therefore,  meet  the  three-year  residence  qualifica- 
tion. Those  thus  disfranchised,  of  course,  bitterly  hated 
the  Assembly.  Another  law  was  then  passed  restricting 
the  freedom  of  the  press  by  re-establishing  the  requirement 
of  a  preliminary  deposit  of  50,000  francs  from  all  editors. 
This  stamped  out  of  existence  most  of  the  cheap  newspapers 
of  the  Republicans  and  Socialists,  as  they  could  not  meet 
the  qualification. 

Having  silenced  the  Republicans,  the  victors,  President 


THE  COUP  D'ETAT  OF  1851  203 

and  Assembly,  fell  to  warring  with  each  other.  This  con-  President 
flict,  showing  itself  in  many  minor  matters,  became  most  .. 
pronounced  and  bitter  over  the  question  of  a  revision  of  vision  of 
the  Constitution.  The  Constitution  forbade  the  re-election  ^^^  Consti- 
of  the  President  at  the  end  of  his  four-year  term.  Louis 
Napoleon  had  no  desire  to  retire  to  private  life.  He 
believed  that  if  only  this  article  were  stricken  out  the 
immense  majority  of  Frenchmen  would  re-elect  him.  He 
demanded  that  this  clause  be  revised  by  the  Assembly. 
The  Assembly  refused.  The  President  was  balked  in 
his  ambition  of  continuing  in  power  by  peaceful  means. 
He  now  showed  that  he  was  ready  to  resort  to  any 
means  to  that  end.  He  planned  and  carried  out  with 
extraordinary  precision  and  success  a  remarkable  coup 
d'etat.  In  order  to  discredit  the  Assembly  with  the  people, 
he  demanded  that  the  law  limiting  the  suffrage,  which  he 
himself  had  strongly  urged,  be  repealed.  This  was  refused, 
the  Assembly  not  wishing  to  stultify  itself  so  conspicuously. 
The  President,  with  audacious  duplicity,  then  posed  as  the 
guardian  of  the  Constitution,  as  the  representative  of  the 
principle  of  universal  suffrage.  He  believed  that  the  work- 
men would  not  intervene  in  behalf  of  the  Assembly  if  he 
should  attack  it. 

For  a  successful  coup  d'etat  secrecy  was  the  absolute 
prerequisite,  and  never  was  secrecy  better  guarded.  Pos- 
sessing the  power  of  appointment  to  civil  and  military  posi- 
tions, the  President  filled  the  more  important  ones  with 
creatures  of  his  own,  who  had  everything  to  gain  and  little 
to  lose  from  the  overthrow  of  the  existing  system.  Such  were 
the  Minister  of  War,  who  controlled  the  army ;  the  Minister 
of  the  Interior,  who  controlled  the  officials  in  the  departments ; 
and  the  Prefect  of  Police,  who  controlled  the  police  of  Paris. 

The  2d  of  December,  1851,  anniversary  of  the  coronation  The 
of  Napoleon  I  and  of  the  battle  of  Austerlitz,  was  chosen  Coup  d'dtat 
as  the  fateful  day.      During  the  early  morning  hours  many 
of  the  military  and  civil  leaders  of  France,  republican  and 


204  THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 

monarchist,  were  arrested  in  bed  and  taken  to  prison.  A 
battalion  of  infantry  was  sent  to  occupy  the  Legislative 
Chamber.  Placards  were  posted  on  all  the  walls  of  Paris, 
pretending  to  explain  the  President's  purposes.  The  As- 
sembly was  pronounced  dissolved,  universal  suffrage  was  de- 
clared re-established,  the  people  were  convoked  in  their  pri- 
mary assemblies.  The  President  explained  that  he  must  save 
the  Republic  from  its  enemies,  the  Monarchists  and  the  An- 
archists, who  put  "  in  jeopardy  the  repose  of  France,"  that 
he  made  the  people  of  France  arbiter  between  the  Assembly 
and  himself,  "  by  invoking  the  solemn  judgment  of  the  only 
sovereign  that  I  recognize  in  France,  the  people."  To 
accomplish  the  security  the  nation  sorely  needed  after  so 
much  turmoil,  he  proposed  the  following  changes  in  the  con- 
stitution :  the  President  should  hold  office  for  ten  years ; 
ministers  should  be  solely  dependent  upon  him;  there  should 
be  a  council  of  state  to  prepare  the  laws  and  to  discuss 
them  before  the  legislative  body ;  a  legislative  body  to  discuss 
and  vote  the  laws,  elected  by  universal  suffrage;  another 
assembly,  "  composed  of  all  the  illustrious  persons  of  the 
country,"  to  be  the  "  guardian  of  the  fundamental  compact," 
and  of  the  public  liberties.  "  This  system,  created  by  the 
First  Consul  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  has  already 
given  to  France  repose  and  prosperity ;  it  will  guarantee 
them  to  her  again."  The  people  were  called  upon  to  ap- 
prove or  disapprove  these  suggestions. 
Events  of  The  significance  of  all  this  was  at  first  not  apparent  to 

December  those  who  read  the  placards.  But  signs  of  opposition 
began  to  show  themselves  as  their  meaning  became  clearer. 
Some  of  the  deputies,  going  to  their  hall  of  meeting, 
found  entrance  prevented  by  the  military.  Withdraw- 
ing to  another  place,  and  proceeding  to  impeach  the  Presi- 
dent, they  were  attacked  by  the  troops,  who  arrested  a 
large  number,  and  took  them  off  to  prison.  Thus  the  lead- 
ers of  France,  civil  and  military,  were  in  custody,  and  the 
President  saw  no  organized  authority  erect  before  him.    This 


LOUIS  NAPOLEON  BECOMES  EMPEROR     205 

was  the  work  of  the  2d.      Would  the  people  resent  the  high- 
handed acts  of  this  usurper? 

Tlie  President  had  not  neglected  to  make  unprecedented 
preparations  for  this  contingency.  His  police  controlled 
all  the  printing  establishments,  whence  usually  in  periods  of 
crisis  emerged  flaming  appeals  to  revolt;  also  all  the  bell 
towers,  whence  in  revolutionary  times  the  tocsin  was  accus- 
tomed to  ring  out  the  appeal  to  insurrection.  Nevertheless, 
on  the   3d  barricades   were   raised.       On   the   4th   occurred  ^^^ 

the  famous  "  massacre  of  the  boulevards."      Over  150  were     .  ,, 

of  tne 

killed  and  a  large  number  wounded.  Paris  was  cowed.  The  boulevards.'' 
coup  d'etat  was  crowned  with  success.  To  prevent  any  pos- 
sible rising  of  the  provinces  martial  law  was  proclaimed  in 
thirty-two  departments,  thousands  of  arbitrary  arrests  were 
made,  and  the  work  on  which  the  Prince  President  entered 
on  the  night  of  December  2d  was  thoroughly  carried  out. 
Probably  a  hundred  thousand  arrests  were  made  through- 
out France.  All  who  appeared  dangerous  to  Louis  Na- 
poleon were  either  transported,  exiled,  or  imprisoned.  This 
vigorous  policy  was  aimed  particularly  at  the  Republicans, 
who  were  for  years  completely  silenced. 

Having  thus  abolished  all  opposing  leadership,  Louis  Na-  The 
poleon  appealed  to  the  people  for  their  opinion  as  to  in- 
trusting  him  with  power  to  remodel  the  Constitution  along 
the  lines  indicated  in  his  proclamation.  On  December  20, 
7,439,216  voted  in  favor  of  so  doing,  and  only  640,737 
voted  in  the  negative.  While  the  election  was  in  no  sense 
fair,  while  the  issue  presented  was  neither  clear  nor  simple, 
while  force  and  intimidation  were  resorted  to,  yet  it  was 
evident  that  a  large  majority  of  Frenchmen  were  willing 
to  try  again  the  experiment  of  a  Napoleon. 

The  Republic,  though  officially  continuing  another  year.  Napoleon 

was   now   dead.       Louis    Napoleon,   though    still   nominally        '     ^' 

.     J,  .  peror,  Dec. 

President,  was  m  fact  an  absolute  sovereign.     It  was  a  mere  ^    1852. 

detail  when  a  year  later  (November  21,  1852)   the  people 

of  France  were  permitted  to  vote  on  the  question  of  re- 


206  THE  SECOND  REPUBLIC 

establishing  the  imperial  dignity,  and  of  proclaiming  Louis 
Napoleon  Bonaparte  emperor,  under  the  name  of  Napoleon 
IIL  7,824<,189  Frenchmen  voted  yes ;  253,145  voted  no.  On 
the  anniversary  of  the  coup  d'etat,  December  2d,  a  day  so 
fortunate  for  Bonapartes,  Napoleon  III  was  proclaimed  Em- 
peror of  the  French,  and  the  Second  Empire  was  established. 

THE   SECOND   EMPIRE 

The  President  who,  by  the  endless  witchery  of  a  name, 
by  a  profitable  absence  of  scruples,  and  by  favorable  circum- 
stances, had  known  how  to  become  an  Emperor,  was  no  mere 
vulgar  adventurer,  but  was  a  man  of  ideas  as  well  as  au- 
dacity, of  generosity  as  well  as  egoism,  of  humanitarian 
aspirations  for  the  betterment  of  the  world,  as  well  as  of  a 
vivid  perception  of  the  pleasures  of  personal  advancement. 
His  ideas,  expounded  gracefully  in  writings  and  in  speeches, 
were  largely  derived  from  a  study  of  the  life  of  the  Great 
Napoleon        Napoleon.     Long  before  he  became  President  of  the  Republic 

'  he  published  a  book  called  "  Napoleonic  Ideas,"  an  appraisal 

1808-1873.  ....  . 

of  the  historic  significance  of  the  First  Emperor.     It  appears 

from  this  that  Napoleon  I  had  two  purposes  in  life.  One 
was  the  preservation  of  all  that  was  valuable  in  the  Revolu- 
tion, the  foundation  of  the  state  and  of  society  upon  a  solid, 
enduring  basis — which  could  only  be  accomplished  by  the 
exercise  of  absolute  power  on  the  part  of  the  ruler — and 
the  other  was  that  this  great  end  having  been  attained,  the 
preliminary,  probationary  period  of  despotism  would  give 
way,  and  the  edifice  would  then  be  "  crowned  with  liberty," 
which  it  were  unsafe  earlier  to  bestow — that  through  the 
training  received  from  an  active  and  intelligent  despot  France 
would  be  fitted  to  enter  upon  the  life  of  freedom,  which 
appears  to  be  the  goal  as  well  as  the  dream  of  modem 
times. 

That  the  latter  part  of  Napoleon's  plans,  the  bestowal 
of  free  institutions  upon  France,  had  not  been  achieved  was, 
in  his  nephew's  opinion,  no  fault  of  his,  but  of  those  ignorant 


THE  INSTITUTIONS  OF  THE  EMPIRE      207 

and  reactionary  nations  which  had  waged  war  upon  him,  had  The  pro- 
defeated  him  at  Waterloo,  and  had  thus  cut  right  athwart  f,  ^°^°^*  ° 
his   beneficent    activity.       However   inaccurate    a   judgment  Emperor, 
this  may  have  been,  it  was  of  importance,  as  it  furnished 
the  new  ruler  with  a  programme.    He  declared  his  desire  to 
finish  the  work  his  uncle  had  been  forced  to  leave  unfinished, 
to    restore   order,   so    sadly    compromised   by   the    unstable, 
feverish  regimes  since  1815 — and  this  he  could  only  do,  he 
held,  by  exercising  autocratic  power — and  then  to  cap  the 
structure  with  liberty  in  all  its  plenitude.      The  history  of 
the  Second  Empire  falls  into  these  two  divisions — autocracy 
unlimited  from  1852  to  1860,  and  a  growing  liberalism  from 
1860  to  1870,  when  the  Empire  collapsed,  its  programme  woe- 
fully unrealized. 

The  political  institutions  of  the  early  Empire  merit  de-  The  politi- 

scription.      They  were  adopted  largely  from  the  Consulate.  ^^   ^^^  ^  ^' 
^  .  -^  ^  ^     .  tions  of  the 

The  machinery  was  elaborate,  and  mainly  valuable  for  pur-  Empire. 

poses  of  deception.  The  principle  of  universal  suffrage, 
proclaimed  by  the  Republic  of  1848,  was  preserved,  was  in- 
deed in  theory  made  the  basis  of  the  whole  imperial  regime, 
but  was  ingeniously  rendered  quite  innocuous  to  the  autocrat. 
There  was  a  Legislative  Body  of  251  members  elected  every 
six  years  by  universal  suffrage.  But  most  modest  was  to 
be  the  role  of  this  assembly.  It  was  to  be  no  real  parlia- 
ment, such  as  had  existed  under  Louis  XVIII,  Charles  X, 
Louis  Philippe,  and  the  late  Republic.  It  could  not  even 
elect  its  own  president,  who  was  appointed,  as  were  the 
vice-presidents,  by  the  Emperor.  It  could  not  propose  legis- 
lation. All  bills  were  laid  before  it  by  the  Emperor.  It 
could  not  question  the  ministers,  or  by  adverse  votes  over- 
throw them,  as  they  were  appointed  by  the  Emperor  and 
were  responsible  to  him  alone.      Its  sessions  were  public,  but  Parliament 

might  be  made  secret  upon  the  request  of  five  members.  Thus  ^^^^  ^  ^ 

muffled, 
when  discussion  became  exciting  it  could  be  prevented  from 

becoming  noised  abroad  that  there  was  dissension  within  the 

state;  indeed,  no  reports  of  these  debates  might  be  pub- 


208  THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 

lished  by  the  newspapers,  save  an  official  minute,  dry,  ana- 
lytical, concise,  dra^vii  up  by  the  presiding  officer,  himself, 
as  has  been  said,  an  appointee  of  the  Emperor.  Political 
eloquence  was  the  evil  spirit  carefully  to  be  exorcised.  No 
more  speeches  of  a  Lamartine,  inflaming  and  shaping  out- 
side opinion.  Parliament  was  absolutely  insulated  from  the 
Its  legisla-  public.  Even  the  subjects  of  legislation  on  which  it  might 
^  express   approval  or  disapproval  were  carefully  limited,   a 

large  legislative  power  belonging  to  the  Emperor  alone.  It 
did  not  even  control  taxation.  Though  it  voted  the  budget 
each  year,  the  Emperor  had  the  right  during  its  recesses 
to  contract  extraordinary  loans,  which,  of  course,  meant  that 
he  virtually  possessed  the  vital  power  of  taxation.  This 
was  really  the  old  regime  back  again. 
The  Senate.  There  was  also  a  Senate,  composed  of  the  Emperor's  ap- 
pointees— marshals,  admirals,  cardinals,  and  others,  irre- 
movable, serving  for  life.  This  body  had  no  legislative 
power,  no  executive  power,  no  judicial  power.  It  was  de- 
clared "  the  guardian  of  the  fundamental  law  " ;  that  is,  the 
Constitution.  All  laws  must  be  submitted  to  it,  not  for 
discussion  and  possible  amendment,  but  that  it  might  oppose 
their  promulgation  if  it  found  them  opposed  to  the  Constitu- 
tion. It  was  to  Interpret  doubtful  or  obscure  phrases  of 
the  Constitution ;  it  might  propose  amendments,  senatus  con- 
sulta,  which  would  become  definite  when  sanctioned  by  the 
Emperor.  Its  powers  were  nominally  extensive,  purposely 
vague,  and  might  easily  become  entirely  inoperative.  The 
Senate,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  was  the  mere  tool  of  the 
Emperor. 
The  Council  There  was  also  a  Council  of  State,  appointed  by  the  Em- 
peror  and  removable  by  him,  with  power  to  frame  laws 
to  be  submitted  by  the  ministers  to  the  Legislative  Body, 
but  with  no  power  of  legislating. 
The  In  the  midst  of  these  numerous  wheels  stood  the  master 

Emperor.        mechanician,   the   Emperor,   Napoleon   III.      His   attributes 
were  real  and  sweeping  in  their  range.      He  had  the  com- 


THE  POWERS  OF  THE  EMPEROR        209 

mand  of  the  army  and  the  navy,  decided  upon  war  and 
peace,  could  alone  conclude  treaties  of  peace,  of  commerce, 
of  political  alliance.  He  was  the  fountain  of  justice,  pos- 
sessing the  full  power  of  pardon.  He  appointed  to  all  im- 
portant offices.  The  ministers  were  absolutely  dependent 
on  him.  He  appointed  the  Council  of  State,  the  Senate, 
the  High  Court,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  could  largely  manipu- 
late the  Legislative  Body,  which,  moreover,  he  alone  could 
convene,  adjourn,  and  dissolve.  He  alone  had  the  right 
to  propose  laws;  the  Council  of  State  worked  them  out  in 
detail,  and  the  Legislative  Body  approved;  after  that  he, 
as  if  his  power  were  not  already  sufficient,  could  sanction 
and  promulgate  them.  Having  dissolved  the  legislature,  he 
need  not  call  another  for  six  months. 

In  short,  the  Emperor  was  the  state.  All  this  machinery  I'^tat! 
did  not  disguise,  but  rather  accentuated  his  autocracy.  The 
important  fact  for  several  years  was  not  the  activity  of 
these  various  bodies,  but  of  the  one  man.  Parliamentary 
institutions,  until  1860,  were  little  else  than  a  sounding- 
board  for  the  wishes  of  the  monarch. 

It  is  true  that  France  had  a  Legislative  Body,  which  was, 
however,  thoroughly  bottled  up,  as  we  have  seen.  This 
body  was  elected  by  universal  suffrage,  but  the  elections 
were  controlled  in  various  ways  by  the  Government.  It 
proposed  in  every  district  an  official  candidate,  whom  it 
forced  all  office-holders  to  support  actively.  It  hampered 
in  numerous  and  ingenious  ways  independent  candidates. 
All  meetings  for  campaign  purposes  were  prohibited  as 
"  prejudicial  to  the  free  exercise  of  the  suffrage."  The  The  press 
press,  so  essential  an  aid  in  any  free  political  life,  was  thor- 
oughly shackled,  so  that  practically  only  those  newspapers 
favorable  to  the  Government  could  flourish.  No  new  jour- 
nal might  be  established  without  the  preliminary  permission 
of  the  Government.  Every  change  of  editor  or  manager 
must  likewise  be  officially  approved.  Also,  as  a  guarantee 
for  good  behavior,  a  deposit  must  be  made,  proportioned  to 


210 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 


the  importance  of  the  place  of  publication,  which  might  be 
as  high  as  50,000  francs  for  Paris,  as  high  as  15,000  for 
the  departments.  A  system  of  warnings  was  developed, 
whereby  after  two  warnings  that  articles  had  appeared  dis- 
agreeable to  the  Government,  the  publication  might  be  in- 
definitely suspended.  New  press  misdeameanors  were 
created.  To  describe  the  sessions  of  the  Legislative  Body 
other  than  by  the  publication  of  the  official  minutes  was 
one  of  these.  To  publish  false  news  another.  Press  cases 
were  taken  from  juries,  who  showed  a  tendency  to  be  just, 
and  handed  over  to  special  courts  which  had  the  right  to 
act  summarily. 

Under  this  system  political  life  was  completely  stamped 
out,  intellectual  independence  well-nigh  extinguished.  Re- 
pression was  all-powerful  and  endlessly  pervasive.  France 
was  no  longer  a  land  of  freedom.  For  several  years  she 
breathed  a  mephitic  atmosphere  of  intellectual  humiliation 
and  effacement. 
The  Empire  j^  return  for  all  this  Napoleon  sought  to  entertain  and 
divert  and  enrich  France.  His  government  was  "  both  re- 
pressive and  progressive — repressive  of  whatever  imperiled 
his  power,  progressive  in  devotion  to  whatever  might  adorn 
and  strengthen  it."  ^  Marrying  at  this  time  a  young 
Spanish  woman  of  twenty-six  years,  of  remarkable 
beauty  and  of  noble  birth.  Mile.  Eugenie  de  Monti  jo,  *'  a 
marriage  of  love,"  as  he  told  the  French  people,  the 
Tuileries  immediately  became  the  center  of  a  court  life 
probably  the  most  brilliant  and  luxurious  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  Fete  followed  fete  in  swift  succession.  Life 
could  not  be  more  lavish  or  more  gay.  Sumptuous 
and  showy,  the  balls,  dinners,  military  parades,  illuminations 
were,  it  was  given  out,  not  mere  self-indulgence  for  the 
favored  few,  but  were  of  advantage  to  all  France.  Did 
they  not  encourage  business  and  trade.?  A  shower  of  gold 
wherever  it  fell  was  considered  highly  fructifying.  Some 
^  Gorce,  Histoire  du  Second  Empire,  II,  3. 


both  re- 
pressive 
and  pro 
gressive. 


POLICIES  OF  NAPOLEON  III  211 

criticized,  asking  if  it  was  worth  while  to  overthrow  parlia- 
ment in  order  to  put  an  orchestra  in  its  place,  but  in  the 
main,  joy  was  unconfined;  and  bourgeois  society  paid  court 
society  the  genuine  compliment  of  imitation. 

But  pleasure  did  not  engross  the  attention  of  the  new  "^^^ 
sovereign.  His  reign  was  distinguished  by  a  spirit  of  great  _„^^yitieB. 
enterprise,  kindly  feeling  for  the  masses,  good  works  of 
benefit  to  the  different  classes  of  society.  The  Emperor 
was  no  incorrigible  conservative  like  Metternich,  but  a  very 
modern  man,  anxious  that  his  reign  should  be  memorable 
for  works  of  utility,  of  improvement.  He  had  a  genuine 
love  for  humanity,  a  sincere  desire  to  help  those  who  are 
heavy  laden.  He  founded  hospitals  and  asylums  freely, 
and  relief  societies  of  various  kinds  for  the  poor.  The  free 
distribution  of  medicines  was  provided  for.  In  1864  labor- 
ers were  given  for  the  first  time  in  French  history  the  right 
to  strike,  which  has  proved  a  most  important  weapon  in 
their  hands  for  the  betterment  of  their  conditions.  Banks  Economic 
were  organized  from  which  landed  proprietors,  both  great  ^'^^^P* 
and  small,  might  obtain  loans  on  easy  terms  to  enable  them 
to  carry  on  improvements  in  agriculture.  The  railways,  de- 
nounced by  Thiers  as  "  the  costly  luxury  of  the  rich,"  "  toys 
for  the  Parisians,"  were  extended  in  a  few  years  from  a 
mileage  of  2,000  to  one  of  6,000.  Steamboat  lines  were 
established  to  enlarge  the  markets  of  France  by  trans- 
atlantic commerce.  Canals  were  begun.  For  the  Emperor 
was  distinctly  a  man  of  his  age,  responsive  to  new  ideas,  and 
sincerely  enthusiastic  in  promoting  all  the  progress  in  the 
arts  and  trades  which  the  marvelous  discoveries  of  modern 
science  rendered  possible.  No  class  of  the  population  was 
ignored  in  these  schemes.  In  Napoleon's  opinion,  preceding 
governments  had  failed  precisely  because  they  had  considered 
only  a  class — the  Legitimist  monarchy  only  the  aristocracy, 
the  Orleanist  monarchy  only  the  rich  bourgeoisie.  The 
Empire,  he  said,  stood  for  no  class,  but  for  the  nation  in 
all  its  entirety.      A  great  international  exposition  was  held 


C>10 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 


Paris 
beautified. 


General 
prosperity. 


The  Con- 
gress of 
Paris,   1856. 


in  Paris  in  1855,  bringing  thousands  of  visitors  to  Paris,  and 
giving  a  distinct  impulsion  to  material  progress  by  its  im- 
pressive revelation  of  the  wealth  of  the  tools  at  man's  dis- 
posal. 

A  grandiose  scheme  for  the  modernization  and  beautifica- 
tion  of  Paris  was  projected,  which,  carried  out  by  Baron 
Haussmann,  made  it  the  most  attractive  and  comfortable 
capital  in  Europe.  This  transformation  of  the  capital, 
indeed,  was  one  of  the  principal  undertakings  of  the  Second 
Empire,  an  undertaking  in  process  of  execution  during  the 
entire  course  of  the  reign. 

All  these  enterprises  greatly  stimulated  commerce.  An 
era  of  unwonted  speculation  now  set  in.  The  Stock  Ex- 
change reflected  vividly  the  buoyancy  and  daring  of  the 
period.  Fortunes  were  made  quickly,  and  of  a  size  hitherto 
unknown  in  France.  Thus,  in  an  air  of  general  prosperity, 
of  economic  expansion,  of  multifarious  activity,  men  forgot 
their  loss  of  liberty,  and  even  the  great  famines,  great  floods, 
and  important  business  failures  which  occurred  during  this 
period  did  not  produce  the  usual  unrest.  They  were  re- 
garded as  merely  the  reverse  of  what  was,  in  the  main,  a 
most  attractive  picture. 

In  1856  Napoleon  III  was  at  the  zenith  of  his  power. 
The  Empire  had  been  recognized  by  all  the  other  states  of 
Europe.  The  Emperor  had,  with  England  and  Piedmont 
as  allies,  waged  a  successful  war  against  Russia  in  the 
Crimea.^  He  was  supposed  to  have  the  best  army  in  Europe, 
and  he  was  honored  in  the  face  of  all  the  world  by  having 
Paris  chosen  as  the  seat  of  the  congress  which  drew  up 
the  treaties  at  the  end  of  that  war.  And  now  an  heir  was 
born  to  him,  the  Prince  Imperial,  as  interesting  to  his  day 
and  as  ill-fated  as  the  King  of  Rome  had  been  in  his.  For- 
tune seemed  to  have  emptied  her  full  horn  of  plenty  upon 
the  author  of  the  coup  d'etat. 

But  the  Empire  had  already  reached  its  apogee,  though 

^See  Chapter  XXVIII. 


THE  EMPIRE  AND  PEACE  213 

this  was  not  evident  for  some  time.     The  Emperor's  policy  The 

liad   thus   far  been   dominated  by   a   very   clear   perception     "^P^^^^  ^ 

,  .       policy  of 

of  self-interest.      Now  it  was  to  change,  become  less  precise,  peace. 

bolder,  and  more  uncertain,  calculated  to  arouse  criticism 
and  to  create  a  lack  of  confidence,  a  general  sense  of  in- 
security. In  preparing  France  for  the  Empire  while  yet 
he  was  the  dictatorial  President  of  1852,  Napoleon  had  taken 
special  care  to  reassure  her  on  one  point.  As  the  First 
Empire  had  been  a  period  of  unexampled  war,  would  not 
the  Second  be  the  same?  In  a  speech  at  Bordeaux,  which 
became  famous,  Napoleon  had  with  great  deliberation  treated 
this  subject.  "  Nevertheless,"  said  he,  "  there  is  a  fear  to 
Avhich  I  ought  to  reply.  In  a  spirit  of  distrust  certain 
people  say :  the  Empire  is  war.  But  I  say :  the  Empire  is 
peace.  I  confess,  however,  that  I,  like  the  Emperor,  have 
many  conquests  to  make.  I  wish,  like  him,  to  win  and  to 
reconcile  the  hostile  parties,"  and  to  achieve  economic  and 
moral  victories  of  various  kinds.  "...  Such  are  the  con- 
quests that  I  contemplate,  and  all  of  you  who  surround 
me,  who  desire,  like  myself,  the  welfare  of  the  fatherland, 
you  are  my  soldiers."  To  the  latter  sort  of  con- 
quests the  Emperor  gave  himself,  as  we  have  seen,  with 
energy  and  success.  But  the  other  part  of  his  promise 
he  did  not  adhere  to.  Wars  were  frequent  in  his  reign, 
wars  not  forced  upon  him  but  created  by  him,  wars 
disastrous  to  himself  and  to  his  dynasty,  as  the  more 
famous  ones  of  the  First  Empire  had  been  to  the  First 
Napoleon. 

The  policy  of  the  Empire  at  home  after  1860  was  deter- 
mined by  the  policy  abroad.      This  was  determined  by  the 
Emperor,  who  had  uncontrolled  rights  of  making  war,  which 
rights    he   unwisely   used.        The   beginning   of   his    serious  The   Italian 
troubles    was    his    participation    in    the    Italian    war    of  ^^^  °^ 
1859.  ^^^^' 

To   understand   the   course   of  the   Second  Empire   from 
1860  to  1870  one  must  study  the  part  played  by  Napoleon 


21 4,  THE  SECOND  EMPIRE 

III  in  the  making  of  modern  Italy,  the  consequences  of 
which  were  to  be  for  him  so  unexpected,  so  far-reaching, 
and  in  the  end  so  disastrous.  And  correctly  to  appraise 
that  policy  we  must  first  trace  the  history  of  the  rise  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Italy. 


CHAPTER  X 

CAVOUR  AND  THE  CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

OF  ITALY 

CAVOUR  AND  NAPOLEON  III 

With  the  failure  of  the  revolutions  of  1848-9  Italy  re-  Reaction  in 
turned  to  her  former  condition,  of  division  into  small  states,  ^g^g 
arbitrary  government,  and  domination  of  Austria.  The 
punishment  of  Liberals  was  general,  and  at  times  savage, 
particularly  in  Lombardy-Venetia  and  in  Naples.  In  the 
latter  case  the  proceedings  were  so  iniquitous  that  Glad- 
stone, in  a  flaming  pamphlet,  denounced  the  Neapolitan 
government  as  the  very  negation  of  God  erected  into  a 
system.  After  the  Pope's  return  to  Rome,  his  government 
was  guilty  of  such  misdeeds  that  its  supporter,  Louis  Na- 
poleon, protested,  though  in  vain.  In  Tuscany  the  govern- 
ment was  characterized  by  severity,  in  Lombardy  and 
Venetia  by  long-continued  persecutions.  Constitutions  that 
had  been  granted  were  generally  revoked.  One  state  in 
the  peninsula  formed  a  brilliant  exception  to  this  sorry 
system  of  reaction — Piedmont.  Though  badly  defeated  on 
the  battlefield  at  Custozza  in  1848,  and  at  Novara  in  1849, 
it  had  gained  an  important  moral  victory.  An  Italian  prince 
had  risked  his  throne  twice  for  the  cause  of  Italian  in- 
dependence, conduct  which  for  multitudes  of  Italians  marked 
the  House  of  Savoy  as  the  leader  of  the  future.  More- 
over, the  king  who  had  done  this,  Charles  Albert,  had  also 
granted  his  people  a  constitution.  He  had  abdicated  after 
the  battle  of  Novara,  and  his  son,  Victor  Emmanuel  II,  then 
twenty-nine  years  of  age,  had  come  to  the  throne. 

215 


216      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

Victor  Austria  offered  Victor  Emmanuel  easy  terms  of  peace  if 

he  would  abrogate  this  constitution,  and  prospects  of  aggran- 

1878.  dizement  were  dangled  before  him.     He  absolutely  refused. 

This  was  a  turning  point  in  his  career,  in  the  history  of 
Piedmont,  and  in  that  of  Italy.      It  won  him  the  popular 

Piedmont    a  title  of  the  Honest  King.      It  made  Piedmont  the  one  hope 

constitu-  q£  Italian  Liberals.  She  was  national  and  constitutional. 
Henceforth  her  leadership  was  assured.  For  the  next  ten 
years  her  history  is  the  history  of  the  making  of  the  King- 
dom of  Italy.  Thither  Liberals  who  were  driven  out  of 
the  other  states  took  refuge,  and  their  number  was  large. 

Victor  Emmanuel  was  a  brave  soldier,  a  man,  not  of  bril- 
liant mind,  but  of  sound  and  independent  judgment,  of  abso- 
lute loyalty  to  his  word,  of  intense  patriotism.  And  he 
had  from  1850  on,  in  his  leading  minister.  Count  Camillo  di 
Cavour,  one  of  the  greatest  statesmen  and  diplomatists  of 
the  nineteenth  century. 

Count  Cavour  was  born  in  1810.      His  family  belonged  to  the 

avour,  nobility   of  Piedmont.       He   received   a   military   education 

1810-1861.  .  ^  .  -^     .      . 

and  joined  the  army  as  an  engineer.       But  by  his  liberal 

opinions,  freely  expressed,  he  incurred  the  hostility  of  his 
superiors  and  was  kept  for  a  time  in  semi-imprisonment. 
He  resigned  his  commission  in  1831,  and  for  the  next  fifteen 
years  lived  the  life  of  a  country  gentleman,  developing 
his  estates.  By  studying  the  new  scientific  processes  of 
agriculture,  by  introducing  and  inducing  others  to  introduce 
machinery,  by  experimenting  with  canal  irrigation  and  arti- 
ficial fertilizers,  he  was  largely  instrumental  in  revolution- 
izing farming  in  Piedmont.  During  these  years,  to  vary  the 
monotony  of  existence,  he  visited  France  and  England 
repeatedly,  interested  particularly  in  political  and  economic 
questions.  He  was  anxious  to  play  a  part  in  politics  him- 
self, though  he  saw  no  chance  in  a  country  as  yet  without 
representative  institutions.  "  Oh !  if  I  were  an  English- 
man," he  said,  "  by  this  time  I  should  be  something,  and 
ray  name  would  not  be  wholly  unknown."     Meanwhile,  he 


COUNT  CAMILLO  DI  CAVOUR  S17 

studied  abroad  the  institutions  he  desired  for  his  own  country,  His  interest 
particularly  the  English  parliamentary  system.  Night  after 
night  he  sat  in  the  gallery  of  the  House  of  Commons,  seeking  nomic  ques- 
to  make  himself  thoroughly  familiar  with  its  modes  of  proce-  tions. 
dure.  Cavour's  mind  was  the  opposite  of  Mazzini's,  practical, 
positive,  not  poetical  and  speculative.  He  wrote  on  social  and 
economic  questions.  Particularly  did  he  advocate  the  build- 
ing of  railroads  as  tending  effectively  to  promote  the  moral 
unity  of  Italy,  which  must  precede  political  unity.  They 
would  sweep  away  local  jealousies  and  bind  the  Italians 
of  different  sections  together  commercially.  Rome  ought 
to  be  the  center  of  the  system,  which  should  unite  the  whole 
peninsula.  In  all  these  plans  for  the  material  enrichment 
of  Piedmont  and  of  Italy,  he  was  dominated  by  the  patriotic 
consideration  that  they  would  contribute  to  the  achievement 
of  independence  and  unity.  In  1847,  when  the  censorship 
of  the  press  was  abolished  in  Piedmont,  Cavour  saw  that 
his  opportunity  had  come,  left  his  retirement,  and  founded 
a  liberal  newspaper  called  II  Risorgimento.  Its  aims  were  Becomes  an 
"  independence,  union  between  the  princes  and  people, 
and  reforms."  He  welcomed  with  enthusiasm  the  creation 
in  1848  of  a  parliament  for  Piedmont  and  of  a  constitution, 
which  he  had,  indeed,  been  one  of  the  boldest  to  demand. 
"  Italy,"  he  said,  "  must  make  herself  by  means  of  liberty, 
or  we  must  give  up  trying  to  make  her."  This  belief  in 
parliamentary  institutions  Cavour  held  tenaciously  all 
through  his  life,  even  when  at  times  they  seemed  to  be  a 
hindrance  to  his  policies.  He  believed  that  in  the  end, 
sooner  or  later,  the  people  reach  the  truth  of  a  matter.  He 
was  elected  to  the  first  Piedmontese  Parliament,  was  taken 
into  the  cabinet  in  1850,  and  became  prime  minister  in  1852.  Cavour 

He  held  this  position  for  the  remainder  of  his  life,  with  the  f  ^       __. 
^  ^  ister,   1852. 

exception  of  a  few  months,  proving  himself  a  great  states- 
man and  an  incomparable  diplomat. 

Cavour  had  said  in  1850,  with  an  optimism  and  a  courage 
not  daunted  by  the  disastrous  defeats  of  Custozza  and  No- 


218      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Policy   of 
economic 
develop- 
ment. 


Cavour 
seeks  a 
military 
ally. 


vara,  tliat  if  Piedmont  would  "  gather  to  itself  all  the  living 
forces  in  Italy  it  would  be  in  a  position  to  lead  our  mother 
country  to  those  high  destinies  whereunto  she  is  called." 
To  accomplish  this,  he  now  said,  "  Piedmont  must  begin 
by  raising  herself,  by  re-establishing  in  Europe  as  well  as 
in  Italy  a  position  and  a  credit  equal  to  her  ambition."  He 
threw  himself  with  enthusiasm  and  intelligence  into  his  pre- 
liminary work  of  making  Piedmont,  a  small  and  poor  coun- 
try, strong,  vigorous,  modern,  of  calling  the  attention  of 
the  great  powers  to  this  little  state  beneath  the  Alps.  To 
accomplish  this  the  army  must  be  reorganized  and  strength- 
ened, the  fleet  built  up,  fortifications  erected.  This  would 
involve  immense  expenditure.  But  Piedmont's  debt  had 
been  greatly  increased  by  the  late  war.  The  interest  on 
it  had  mounted  from  about  two  million  lire  In  1847  to  thirty 
million  in  1852.  There  were  large  annual  deficits ;  bank- 
ruptcy appeared  imminent.  Economy  rather  than  expendi- 
ture seemed  imperative.  Not  so  thought  Cavour.  He  be- 
lieved in  spending  freely  on  improvements,  because  they 
were  necessary,  and  because  in  the  end  larger  revenues  would 
result.  He  urged  large  appropriations  not  only  for  the  army, 
but  for  public  works.  He  encouraged  agriculture,  completed 
the  railway  system  of  Piedmont,  stimulated  commerce  and  in- 
dustry by  treaties  of  commerce  with  other  states,  secula- 
rized some  of  the  monastic  lands,  levied  new  taxes,  all  this, 
of  course,  by  securing  the  necessary  laws  from  Parliament. 
The  result  of  all  this  activity  was  that  Piedmont  entered 
upon  a  period  of  rapid  growth  in  material  prosperity,  and 
the  new  burdens  were  as  easily  borne  as  the  old  had  been. 
Cavour  was  thus  able  to  create  a  large  and  well-equipped 
army  of  ninety  thousand  men,  remarkable  for  a  state  whose 
population  was  only  five  million.  And  this  facilitated  his 
next  object,  which  was  to  secure  for  Piedmont  an  ally  among 
the  great  powers,  for  this  he  considered  absolutely  necessary 
if  she  were  to  accomplish  her  high  mission.  Cavour 
believed,  as  did  all  true  patriots,  that  Austria  must  be  driven 


PIEDMONT  AND  THE  CRIMEAN  WAR      219 

out    of    Italy    before    any    Italian    regeneration    could    be 

achieved.      But  he  did  not  believe  with  Mazzini  and  others 

that  the  Italians  could  accomplish  this  feat  alone.      In  his 

opinion  the  history  of  the  last  forty  years  had  shown  that 

plots  and  insurrections  would  not  avail.      It  was  essential 

to   win  the  aid  of  a  great  military  power  comparable  in 

strength  and  discipline  to  Austria.      This  explains  why  he 

urged  that  Piedmont  participate  in  the  Crimean  war. 

The  Crimean  war  was  fought  in  1854  and  1855  by  France  Why 

and  England  against  Russia,  to  prevent  the  latter  power  Piedmont 

Dsirtici" 

from  dismembering  the  Turkish  Empire.      There  seemed  to  ^^^^^  jj^ 

be  no  reason  for  a  small  and  struggling  state  like  Piedmont  the  Cri- 
to  interfere.  It  had  no  serious  quarrel  with  Russia.  The  mean  war. 
preservation  or  dismemberment  of  Turkey  was  for  it  a  matter 
of  only  remote  concern.  Yet  Cavour,  looking  beyond  the 
immediate  question,  believed  that  Piedmont's  and  Italy's  in- 
terests would  be  subserved  by  an  alliance  offensive  and  de- 
fensive with  the  two  western  powers  against  Russia.  For 
he  believed  that  thus  Piedmont  would  win  the  good  will  of 
her  two  allies,  and  might  take  her  place  as  an  equal  at  the 
council  board  of  European  diplomacy.  Such  a  position 
this  state,  petty  and  poor,  in  comparison  with  France  and 
England  and  Austria  and  Russia,  with  barely  five  millions 
of  people,  had  hitherto  not  held.  Among  the  "  powers " 
she  was  practically  unrecognized.  For  reasons,  then,  quite 
remote  from  the  real  question  at  issue,  and  reasons,  there- 
fore, which  Cavour  could  not  publicly  give,  he  wished  to  use 
this  opportunity.  His  plan  was  bitterly  denounced  and 
generally  condemned.  It  was  said  that  the  quarrel  was 
none  of  Piedmont's,  that  by  sending  her  army  to  the  Crimea 
she  would  be  exposing  her  own  frontiers,  that  her  finances 
would  be  ruined  by  this  additional  strain,  that  she  should 
husband  her  money  and  her  men  for  her  own  struggle,  which 
must  ultimately  come  with  Austria.  Her  resources  would 
be  none  too  great  at  best.  Cavour  himself  called  the  risks 
of  the  venture  "  enormous." 


220      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Cavour  at 
the    Con- 
gress of 
Paris. 


Discussion 
of  the 
Italian 
question. 


Moral 
victory 
for    Cavour. 


But  he  succeeded  in  carrying  it  through.  Seventeen  thou- 
sand Sardinians  were  sent  to  the  Crimea,  where  they  proved 
excellent  soldiers  and  won  distinction.  But  Cavour  was  not 
aiming  primarily  at  military  glory,  but  at  moral  and  diplo- 
matic victories.  Piedmont  had  entered  the  alliance  uncon- 
ditionally. She  was  not  promised  that,  participating  in 
the  war,  she  would  be  permitted  to  participate  in  the  making 
of  the  peace,  and  when  the  Congress  of  Paris  was  called  in 
1856  Cavour  started  out  not  knowing  whether  he  would  be 
admitted  to  it,  owing  to  Austria's  opposition.  He  was  going  to 
Paris,  he  said,  in  order  "  to  sniff  the  air."  But  a  few  days 
after  his  arrival  he  was  informed  that  he  would  be  received. 
The  two  great  powers  could  not  well  consent  to  the  ignoring 
of  their  ally.  Cavour  had  won  the  interest  of  Napoleon  III, 
who  in  1855  had  asked  him,  "  What  can  be  done  for  Italy.''  " 
Cavour  had  replied  by  a  memorandum.  Now  in  Paris, 
after  the  treaty  had  been  made.  Napoleon  caused  the  ques- 
tion of  Italy — a  question  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  the 
Congress — to  be  brought  before  it.  This  was  Cavour's 
chance.  The  Italian  situation  was  to  be  discussed  in  a 
congress  in  which  Austria  sat.  Clarendon,  representing 
England,  indignantly  denounced  the  Papal  Government  as  a 
"  disgrace  to  Europe,"  and  Ferdinand's  misinile  in  Naples 
as  crying  for  the  intervention  of  the  civilized  world.  This 
speech  created  an  extraordinary  sensation.  Moreover,  by 
bringing  the  Italian  question  forward,  it  furnished  Cavour  an 
opportunity  to  speak.  His  speech  was  brief,  cautious,  and 
bold.  The  main  cause  of  the  evils  from  which  Italy  suffered 
was  Austria,  he  declared.  "  Austria  is  the  arch-enemy  of 
Italian  independence;  the  permanent  danger  to  the  only 
free  nation  in  Italy,  the  nation  which  I  have  the  honor  to 
represent." 

Cavour  returned  from  Paris  with  no  material  advantage 
gained,  but  his  moral  victory  was  complete.  Piedmont  had 
participated  in  a  council  of  the  great  powers.  Austria 
had  been  indicted  publicly  in  a  great  international  congress. 


THE  NATIONAL  SOCIETY  221 

So  had  the  Pope,  and  so  had  the  King  of  Naples.     Piedmont 

had  again  shown  that  she  was  the  champion  of  all  Italy. 

Many  who,  influenced  by  Mazzini,  had  hitherto  believed  that 

Italy's  salvation  lay  in  a  republic,  began  to   change  their 

opinion,   and   to   entertain   an   increasing   confidence   in   the 

patriotism    and    statesmanship    and   military    power   of   the 

Piedmontese  monarchy.       Cavour  had  gained  for  himself  a 

great  reputation  as  a  diplomatist.      Prince  Metternich,  now 

in  retirement,  and  a  connoisseur  in  such  matters,  is  said  to 

have  remarked :  "  There  is  only  one  diplomatist  in  Europe,  but 

unfortunately  he  is  against  us ;  it  is  M.  de  Cavour."    Cavour 

was  now  one  of  the   commanding  personalities   of  Europe. 

His  position  in  his  own  country  was  more  solid  than  ever. 

After   the    Congress    of    Paris    Piedmont    proceeded    still 

further  to  make  herself  the  model  state   of  Italy.       Laws  Army 

were  passed  strengthening  the   army.       Industry  expanded  strength- 

.  .  cued, 

under  wise  legislation.      Education  was  stimulated,  and  the 

National  Society  was  organized  to  encourage  the  growth 
in  the  other  states  of  Italy  of  a  sentiment  in  favor  of  Pied-  Founding 
mont.  The  motto  of  this  society  was:  "  Independence  and 
Unity;  out  with  the  Austrians  and  the  Pope."  The  sub-  society, 
jects  of  other  states  were  to  be  won  from  their  loyalty  to 
their  own  princes  to  loyalty  to  Piedmont.  A  revolution 
in  opinion  and  sentiment  was  to  be  effected  that  later  a 
political  revolution  might  be  easier.  This  society  was  suc- 
cessful. Many,  like  Manin,  who  had  hitherto  been  Repub- 
licans, renounced  their  republicanism  and  declared  them- 
selves willing  under  certain  conditions  to  follow  Piedmont. 
"  Make  Italy,"  wrote  Manin,  "  and  we  are  with  you ;  if  not, 
not."  The  National  Society  spread  rapidly  throughout 
the  other  states.  By  it  Liberals  everywhere  were  drawn  to- 
gether under  the  banner  of  the  House  of  Savoy,  and  a 
state  of  mind  was  created  favorable  to  the  overthrow  of  the 
petty  princes  and  the  exaltation  of  Piedmont. 

Cavour   had    returned    from    Paris    hoping   that    France 
might  shortly  be  induced  to  aid  Piedmont.     The  Emperor 


222      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Cavour  and  had  in  1855  asked  what  he  could  do  for  Italy,  and  Cavour 
Napoleon  j^^^j  responded  with  all  explicitness.  Suddenly  all  hope  of 
this  consununation  seemed  dashed  to  the  ground  by  a  murder- 
ous attempt  upon  the  life  of  Napoleon  by  certain  Italians, 
led  by  Orsini  (January  14,  1858).  This,  however,  did 
not  deflect  Napoleon  from  the  alliance  with  Sardinia  toward 
which  he  had  been  tending  for  some  time.  The  motives  that 
influenced  him  to  take  the  step  momentous  for  himself 
as  well  as  for  Italy  were  numerous.  The  principle  of 
nationality  which  he  held  tenaciously,  and  which  largely 
determined  the  foreign  policy  of  his  entire  reign,  prompted 
him  in  this  direction — the  principle,  namely,  that  peoples 
of  the  same  race  and  language  had  the  right  to  be  united 
politically.  He  sought,  as  we  shall  see,  to  further  this 
principle  in  several  cases,  with  results  very  disastrous  to 
himself  and  to  France. 

Further,  Napoleon  had  long  been  interested  in  Italy.  He 
had  himself  taken  part  in  the  revolutionary  movements  there 
in  1831,  and  had  probably  been  a  member  of  the  Carbonari. 
Moreover,  it  was  one  of  his  ambitions  to  tear  up  the  treaties 
of  1815,  treaties  that  sealed  the  humiliation  of  the  Na- 
poleonic dynasty.  These  treaties  still  formed  the  basis  of 
the  Italian  political  system  in  1858.  Again,  he  was 
probably  lured  on  by  a  desire  to  win  glory  for  his  throne, 
and  there  was  always  the  chance,  too,  of  gaining  territory. 
Fear,  also,  may  have  influenced  him.  Orsini  had  not  been  the 
first  Italian  who  had  tried  to  assassinate  the  Emperor;  he 
might  not  be  the  last,  if  he  should  do  nothing  for  Italy. 

At  any  rate,  the  Emperor  decided  to  draw  closer  to  Pied- 
mont. Hardly  six  months  after  Orsini's  attempt,  he  in- 
vited Cavour  to  meet  him  at  Plombieres,  a  watering  place 
in  the  Vosges  mountains.  The  meeting,  which  occurred 
July  21,  1858,  was  shrouded  in  utmost  mystery.  Only 
four  persons  in  Piedmont  knew  of  it,  including  Victor  Em- 
manuel and  La  Marmora.  The  ministers  of  Napoleon  were 
kept  in  ignorance  of  it.     The  Emperor,  always  a  dreamer 


The 

interview 
at  Plom- 
bieres. 


THE  INTERVIEW  OF  PLOMBlfeRES         223 

and  conspirator,  was  now  closeted  with  a   conspirator  far 
more  skilful  than  himself.      The  interview  of  Plombieres  is 
one  of  the  most  famous  in  the  history  of  the  century.    There 
were  long  conversations,  a  memorable  description  of  which 
was  contained  in  a  letter  which  Cavour  immediately  sent  to 
Victor  Emmanuel  and  which  constitutes  our  chief  source  of 
information   concerning  the  intrigues   of  two   unscrupulous  -^  con- 
men  conspiring  for  different  reasons  to  bring  about  a  war.^  /^. 
No  written  agreement  or  treaty  of  alliance  was  made,  but  it  a  war. 
was  agreed  verbally  that  France  and  Piedmont  should  go  to 
war  with  Austria,  but  only  upon  some  pretext  which  could  be 
justified  before  Europe,  and  which  would  make  it  appear  that 
the  two  powers  were  not  bent  upon  revolution,  but  that  they 
were    merely    repelling   Austrian   aggression.       A    rising   in 
Massa  and  Carrara  was  to  serve  as  the  pretext.     If  Austria  The 

should  begin  war  against  Piedmont,  France  would  come  to  the 

.  .  .  .         .  agreed 

latter''s  assistance,  and  if  the  allies  were  victorious  Italy  should  upon. 

be  reconstituted  as  follows :  Lombardy  and  Venetia  should  be 
added  to  Piedmont,  as  should  also  the  duchies  and  parts  of 
the  Papal  States,  the  Romagna  and  the  Legations.  Austria 
would  thus  be  completely  expelled  from  the  peninsula,  and 
Victor  Emmanuel  would  rule  over  a  kingdom  of  Northern 
Italy.  The  rest  of  the  Papal  States,  with  the  exception  of 
Rome  and  a  region  round  about  should  be  added  to  Tuscany 
which  would  thus  form  a  kingdom  of  Central  Italy.  These  two 
kingdoms  and  that  of  Naples  and  the  Papal  States  should 
then  be  united  into  an  Italian  Confederation  under  the  presi- 
dency of  the  Pope  who  might  consequently  feel  compensated 
for  the  loss  of  most  of  his  possessions.  In  return  for  her 
aid  France  was  to  receive  Savoy  and  possibly  Nice.  The 
Emperor  urged  a  marriage  between  his  cousin  Prince  Napo- 
leon and  the  daughter  of  Victor  Emmanuel.  No  definite 
agreement  was  then  made.  Prince  Napoleon  was  a  de- 
bauchee   of    forty-three.      Princess    Clotilde    was    a    young 

^Chiala,   Lettere   edite   ed    inedite    di    Camillo    Cavour,    II,   568   seq. 
Snd  edit. 


224      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


position. 


girl  of  sixteen.  Ultimately  this  sacrifice  was  made — so  re- 
volting to  Victor  Emmanuel  and  the  Piedmontese.  Early 
in  December  1858  tliese  verbal  agreements  were  put  into 
writing,  though  not,  it  would  seem,  although  the  matter  is 
most  obscure,  into  a  binding  treaty. 
BifBcnltles  Though  Cavour  had  apparently  achieved  the  dream  of  his 

and  dangers  jj£g^  ^^  alliance  with  a  great  military  power,  his  position 
during  the  next  few  months,  between  the  meeting  at  Plora- 
bieres,  July  1858,  and  the  final  declaration  of  war,  April 
1859,  was  one  of  extraordinary  difficulty.  He  had  invoked 
a  powerful  spirit.  Could  he  control  it,  or  would  he  become 
the  mere  sport  of  it.''  Might  not  Napoleon,  notably  of  a 
changeable  mind,  change  it  now  at  the  critical  time,  leaving 
Piedmont  high  and  dry,  at  the  mercy  of  her  powerful 
neighbor,  Austria,  leaving  Cavour  and  all  his  policy  a 
wreck.''  Might  not  the  other  powers,  getting  wind  of  the  con- 
spiracy, step  in  to  prevent  war,  the  necessity  of  which  was 
the  very  basis  of  Cavour's  policy  for  the  creation  of  modem 
Italy,  as  it  was  of  Bismarck's  policy  later  for  the  creation 
of  modern  Germany?  If  the  war  should  come  and  Napoleon 
should  be  faithful  to  his  engagements,  might  not  the  greatest 
danger  lie  right  there .?  Might  not  a  victorious  Napoleon  in 
Italy  do  what  a  victorious  Napoleon  had  done  in  Italy 
before,  use  his  opportunity  for  his  own  advantage  and  not 
for  that  of  the  Italians,  whom  he  ostensibly  came  to  succor.? 
Cavour  did  not  wish  to  play  a  game  for  Napoleon.  The 
risk  at  any  rate  must  be  run. 

It  had  been  stipulated  by  Napoleon  that  he  would  support 
Piedmont  in  a  war  with  Austria  if  Austria  appeared  as  the 
aggressor.  Cavour's  policy  therefore  for  the  next  months 
was  to  provoke  Austria  to  this  end.  It  was  a  period  of 
great  tension  for  the  Piedmontese  minister,  in  which  he  dis- 
played extraordinary  resourcefulness,  coolness,  craft,  un- 
scrupulousness.  He  wove  ceaselessly  a  marvelous  web  of 
tortuous  intrigue.  Now  Napoleon  seemed  about  to  with- 
draw ;  now  a  congress  of  the  powers  to  cut  clean  through  the 


Cavonr's 
diplomacy 


THE  AUSTRO-SARDINIAN  WAR  225 

projects  of  these  conspirators.  Into  the  interesting  details 
of  these  machinations  we  cannot  go.  In  the  end  they  were 
successful,  and  Austria  was  goaded  by  Cavour's  conduct 
to  take  the  fatal  step.  She  demanded  that  Piedmont  disarm 
within  three  days,  otherwise  war  would  be  declared.  War 
was  precisely  tlie  thing  Cavour  wanted,  and  for  which  he 
had  for  months  been  ceaselessly  working.  He  had  contrived 
to  make  Austria  appear  the  aggressor  and  now  the  case  had 
arisen  for  which  Napoleon  had  promised  his  aid.  Piedmont 
refused  the  Austrian  ultimatum,  and  at  the  end  of  April  The 
1859  war  began.  The  public  opinion  of  other  nations  blamed  Austro- 
Austria  and  exonerated  Piedmont,  most  unjustly,  for  this  ^^^ 
war  was  Cavour's,  desired  by  him  and  brought  about  by  him 
with  extraordinary  skill.  That  he  had  succeeded  in  throw- 
ing the  whole  responsibility  for  it  on  his  enemy  was  only 
further  evidence  of  the  cunning  of  his  fine  Italian  hand. 

The  Austro-Sardinian  war  lasted  only  about  two  months.  The 
The    Austrian    armies    were    large    but    incompetently    led.  ^^^J^^Jf^ 
They  wasted  the  time  before  the  arrival  of  the  French  troops 
when    Piedmont    was    at    their    mercy.     When    the    French 
arrived,  the  Emperor  at  their  head,  active  fighting  began. 
The  theater  of  war  was  limited  to  Lombardy.     The  battles 
of  Magenta    (June  4)    and   of   Solferino    (June   24)    were 
victories  for  the  Allies.     The  latter  was  one  of  the  greatest 
battles  of  the  nineteenth  century.     It  lasted  eleven   hours, 
more  than  260,000  men  were  engaged,  nearly  800  cannon. 
The  Allies  lost  over  17,000  men,  the  Austrians  about  22,000. 
All  Lombardy  was  conquered,  and  Milan  was  occupied.     It 
seemed  that  Venetia  could  be  easily  overrun  and  the  termina- 
tion   of   Austrian    rule    in    Italy    effected,    and    Napoleon's 
statement  that  he  would  free  Italy  "  from  the  Alps  to  the 
Adriatic  "  accomplished.      Suddenly  Napoleon  halted  in  the  ^^®  ^^^' 
full  tide  of  success,  sought  an  interview  with  the  Emperor  ^^  villa- 
of  Austria  at  Villafranca,  and  there  on  July  11th,  without  franca, 
consulting  the  wishes  of  his  ally,  concluded  a  famous  armis- 
tice.    The  terms  agreed  upon  by  the  two  Emperors  were: 


826      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Reasons 
for  Napo- 
leon's 
action. 


(1)  The  creation  of  an  Italian  Confederation  under  the 
honorary  presidency  of  the  Pope.  (2)  The  cession  to 
France,  and  the  transfer  by  France  to  Sardinia,  of  the 
province  of  Lombardy.  (3)  The  inclusion  of  Venetia  in  the 
Italian  Confederation,  as  a  province,  however,  under  the 
Crown  of  Austria.  (4)  The  restoration  of  the  Grand  Duke 
of  Tuscany  and  the  Duke  of  Modena  to  their  respective 
states,  whence  they  had  just  been  driven  by  popular  uprisings. 
The  considerations  that  determined  Napoleon  to  stop  in 
the  middle  of  a  successful  campaign,  and  before  he  had 
attained  the  object  for  which  he  had  come  into  Italy,  were 
many  and  serious.  While  victorious  on  five  battlefields  he 
had  no  reason  to  feel  elated.  Magenta  and  Solferino  had 
been  victories,  but  he  saw  that  they  might  easily  have  been 
defeats.  He  had  conquered  Lombardy,  but  Austria  had 
150,000  men  in  Venetia,  and  100,000  more  were  advancing 
to  join  them.  Austria's  troops  would  then  outnumber  his. 
Moreover  Austria  would  now  plant  herself  firmly  in  the 
famous  Quadrilateral,  whose  fortresses  could  only  be  taken, 
if  at  all,  after  long  and  difficult  sieges.  Furthermore,  the 
control  of  events  was  plainly  slipping  from  him.  The  effect 
of  the  Piedmontese  propaganda  in  the  other  states  of  Italy 
was  already  becoming  apparent.  During  the  war  the  Ro- 
magna  had  thrown  off  its  allegiance  to  the  Pope,  the  author- 
ity of  the  rulers  of  Modena  and  Parma  had  been  renounced 
by  their  rebellious  subjects,  and  all  three — the  Romagna,  the 
two  duchies,  and  Tuscany  also,  were  clamoring  for  annexa- 
tion to  Piedmont.  If  the  war  should  continue  the  other 
Italians  might  show  the  same  determination  and  Napoleon 
might  find  that,  instead  of  an  enlarged  kingdom  of  Piedmont, 
a  kingdom  of  all  Italy  had  been  created,  and  many  of  the 
leading  men  in  France  were  denouncing  as  very  dangerous 
to  France  this  possible  creation  of  a  powerful  state  on  her 
southeastern  border.  The  French  Catholics  were  opposed 
to  the  continuation  of  a  war  so  full  of  menace  to  the  Pope. 
Moreover,  Prussia  was  mobilizing  her  troops  on  the  Rhine 


THE  PEACE  OF  VILLAFRANCA  227 

and  was  contemplating  intervention,  and  France  was  in  no 
condition  to  fight  Austria  and  Prussia  combined.  Also,  the 
Emperor  had  been  touched  by  the  horrors  of  the  battlefield. 
"  The  poor  people,  the  poor  people,  what  a  horrible  thing 
is  war,"  he  was  heard  to  say  more  than  once  at  Solferino. 

Austria  was  eager  for  peace.  Her  army  was  badly  led.  Anstria 
She  was  involved  in  trouble  with  Hungary.  She  did  not  ®*8rer  for 
relish  being  saved  by  Prussia,  for  Prussia  might  then  seize 
her  leadership  in  Germany.  Francis  Joseph,  too,  like  Na- 
poleon, was  horrified  by  war.  "  Better  lose  a  province,"  he 
said  after  Solferino,  "  than  be  present  again  at  so  awful  a 
spectacle."  Thus  both  rulers  were  willing  to  come  to 
terms. 

The  news  of  the  armistice  came  as  a  cruel  disappointment 
to  the  Italians,  dashing  their  hopes  just  as  they  were  appa- 
rently about  to  be  realized.  The  Government  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  had  not  even  been  consulted.  In  intense  indigna- 
tion at  the  faithlessness  of  Napoleon,  overwrought  by  the 
excessive  strain  under  which  he  had  long  been  laboring, 
Cavour  completely  lost  his  self-control,  urged  desperate 
measures  upon  the  King  and,  when  they  were  declined,  in  a 
fit   of  rage,  threw  up  his   office.    The  King  by   overruling  Resigna- 

Cavour  showed  himself  wiser  than  his  gifted  minister.     As  *^°^  °' 

.     Cavour. 
disappointed   as  the  latter,   he  saw   more   clearly   than   did 

Cavour  that  though  Piedmont  had  not  gained  all  that  she  had 
hoped  to,  yet  she  had  gained  much.  It  was  wiser  to  take  what 
one  could  get  and  bide  the  future  than  to  imperil  all  by  some 
mad  course.  Here  was  one  of  the  great  moments  where  the  in- 
dependence and  common  sense  of  Victor  Emmanuel  were  of 
great  and  enduring  service  to  his  country. 

Napoleon  had  not  done  all  that  he  had  planned  for  Italy,  Piedmont 

yet  he  had  rendered  a  very  important  service.     He  had  se-  ^^^^^^^^ 

.  Lombardy. 

cured  Lombardy  for  Piedmont.    It  should  also  be  noted  that 

he  himself  acknowledged  that  the  failure  to  carry  out  the 

whole  programme  had  cancelled  any  claim  he  had  upon  the 

annexation  of  Savoy  and  Nice  to  France. 


228      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

ANNEXATIONS  AFTER  VILLAFRANCA 

Thus  by  the  preliminaries  of  Villafranca,  embodied  later 
in  the  Peace  of  Zurich,  November  10,  1859,  the  Emperor 
of  the  French  and  the  Emperor  of  Austria  put  an  end  to 
the  process  of  Italian  unification  shortly  after  it  had  begun. 
Piedmont  had  grown  by  the  addition  of  Lombardy  and  that 
was  all.  Austria  was  still  an  Italian  power,  and  by  the 
terms  agreed  upon  was  to  be  a  member  of  the  projected 
Italian  Confederation.  That  she  could  use  that  position 
to  continue  her  leadership  in  Italy  was  proved  by  her  success 
in  using  the  German  Confederation  for  purposes  of  leader- 
ship in  Germany.  The  Pope  was  still  a  temporal  ruler  and 
his  power  indeed  was  to  be  augmented  by  the  presidency  of  the 
Confederation.  Thus  the  Austrian  Emperor  and  the  Pope 
stood  in  the  way  of  Italian  aspirations  as  before.  No  wonder 
that  Cavour  said,  though  incorrectly,  that  all  the  efforts 
Piedmont  had  made  during  the  past  ten  years  had  gone  for 
nought.  But  the  Peace  of  Zurich  was  destined  never  to  be 
carried  out  save  in  one  respect  that  Lombardy  was  added  to 
Piedmont.  Victor  Emmanuel  saw  what  Cavour  failed  to  see, 
that  the  chapter  was  not  closed  but  that  it  might  be  carried 
further,  that  central  Italy  at  least  might  be  drawn  into  the 
enlarged  Kingdom  of  Piedmont. 
Central  The  situation  in  central  Italy  was  this:  During  the  war 

the  rulers  of  Modena,  Parma,  Tuscany,  had  been  overthrown, 
and  the  Pope's  authority  in  Romagna,  the  northern  part 
of  his  dominions,  had  been  destroyed.  Assemblies  called  in 
those  states  by  revolutionary  leaders  voted,  in  August  1859, 
in  favor  of  annexation  to  Piedmont.  Thus  the  provinces 
of  central  Italy  hurled  defiance  at  the  two  Emperors  who 
had  decided  at  Villafranca  that  the  rulers  of  those  countries 
should  be  restored.  Piedmont  declined  their  offer  at  the 
time,  knowing  the  opposition  of  Napoleon,  and  fearing  to 
offend  him,  lest  he  might  then  withdraw  from  Italy  entirely, 
thereby  leaving  Piedmont   alone   and  exposed  to  Austrian 


NAPOLEON  III  AND  PIEDMONT  229 

attack.     But  unofficially  Piedmont  gave  them  encouragement 

to  hold  out  foi*  annexation. 

The   Italians   of   the   central   states   stood   firm.     It   was  Impossibil- 

evident  that   the   former  rulers   could   only   be   restored   by  ^  ^  °    ^®" 

•  1         !•  1111  J    storing  the 

force  and  Napoleon  promised  that  force  should  not  be  used,  ^^^  order. 

either  French  or  Austrian,  to  accomplish  their  restoration. 
For  months  this  anomalous  situation  continued,  harassing 
to  every  one.  The  central  states,  under  the  leadership  of 
Piedmontese  statesmen  who  had  gone  to  them  to  assume 
direction,  revised  and  rendered  uniform  their  laws,  and 
created  a  common  military  force  that  they  might  in  the 
end  bring  about  fusion  with  Piedmont.  Diplomacy  sug- 
gested a  congress  which  was  never  convened,  and  for  some 
time  things  drifted.  Slowly  the  whole  confused  situation 
began  to  clarify.  Napoleon  came  to  see  that  if  the  peoples 
were  left  to  themselves  they  would  never  restore  their  rulers 
but  would  insist  upon  union  with  Piedmont;  that,  moreover, 
the  federation  under  the  presidency  of  the  Pope  could  never 
be  brought  about  except  by  force.  He  saw  also  that  the 
restoration  of  the  rulers  to  their  duchies  would  be  an 
advantage  to  Austria  but  not  at  all  to  France.  He  had  no 
desire  that  Austria  should  be  again  predominant  in  the  penin- 
sula.   Other  events  co-operated  to  hasten  a  solution.   In  Eng-  England's 

land,  in  June  1859,  a  new  election  had  occurred  and  a  ministry  f^. 

'  _  '  _  ^  -^  tion  in 

had  come  into  office  which  was  very  friendly  to  the  cause  of  affairs. 
Italian  unity,  and  which  particularly  wished  the  Italians  to 
be  strong  enough  to  be  independent  of  the  French.  The 
English  Government  protested  against  the  employment  of 
French  or  Austrian  forces  to  repress  the  clearly  expressed 
will  of  the  people  of  central  Italy  and  to  restore  the  princes. 
This  was  England's  great  service  to  the  Italians.  "  The 
people  of  the  duchies  have  as  much  right  to  change  their 
sovereigns,"  said  Lord  Palmerston,  "  as  the  English  people 
or  the  French,  or  the  Belgian  or  the  Swedish.  The  annexa- 
tion of  the  duchies  to  Piedmont  will  be  an  unfathomable 
good  to  Italy." 


230      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Cavour 
returns  to 
office. 


Annexa- 
tion to 
Piedmont. 


Another  event  tending  toward  the  solution  of  the  question 
was  tlie  return  of  Cavour  to  power  in  January  1860,  after 
an  absence  of  six  months.  Cavour  saw  that  the  annexation 
of  central  Italy  to  Piedmont  could  be  effected  only  with 
Napoleon's  consent,  which,  therefore,  must  be  secured.  But 
Napoleon  would  not  yet  give  it.  It  was  clear  that  a  bar- 
gain must  be  made.  Piedmont  could  have  the  annexa- 
tions for  a  price  and  that  price  was  the  cession  of  Savoy 
and  Nice  to  France,  which  Napoleon  had  not  claimed  before 
as  he  had  not  carried  out  the  agreement  of  Plombieres,  but 
which  he  now  demanded  as  compensation  for  the  creation  of 
an  important  state  on  the  southeastern  border  of  France,  and 
because  he  wished,  by  enlarging  the  national  boundaries,  to 
allay  the  sharp  criticism  which  his  Italian  policy  had  aroused 
at  home.  It  was  finally  agreed  that  plebiscites  should  be 
taken  in  the  states  of  central  Italy  to  see  if  they  wished 
annexation  to  Piedmont,  and  in  Savoy  and  Nice  to  see  if 
they  wished  annexation  to  France.  Thus,  in  theory,  the 
principle  would  be  upheld  that  peoples  have  a  right  to 
dispose  of  themselves. 

These  plebiscites  in  Italy  resulted  as  was  expected. 
(March  11-12,  1860.)  The  vote  was  almost  unanimous  in 
favor  of  annexation. 

Modena,  Parma,  Tuscany  and  the  Romagna  were  thus 
added  to  the  Kingdom  of  Piedmont,  which  had  already  re- 
ceived Lombardy.  The  Pope  issued  the  major  excommuni- 
cation against  the  authors  of  this  spoliation  of  his  do- 
minions (Romagna),  but  Victor  Emmanuel  accepted  the 
sovereignty  thus  offered  him,  and  on  April  2nd,  1860,  the 
first  parliament  of  the  enlarged  kingdom  met  in  Turin. 
A  small  state  of  less  than  5,000,000  had  grown  to  one  of 
11,000,000  within  a  year.  This  was  the  most  important 
change  in  the  political  system  of  Europe  since  1815.  As 
far  as  Italy  was  concerned  it  made  waste  paper  of  the 
treaties  of  1815.  It  constituted  the  most  damaging  breach 
made  thus  far  in  the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna.     What 


PIEDMONT  CEDES  SAVOY  AND  NICE       231 

that  congress  had  decided  was  to  be  a  mere  "  geographical 

expression  "  was  now  a  nation  in  formation.     And  this  was 

being   accomplished    by    the    triumphant    assertion    of    two 

principles  utterly  odious  to  the  monarchs  of  1815,  the  right 

of  revolution   and  the   right  of  peoples  to  determine   their 

own  destinies  for  themselves,  for  these  annexations  were  the 

result  of  war  and  of  plebiscites. 

But  Piedmont's  triumph  was  not  without  an  element  of  Cession 

bitterness  for  it  had  been  bought  with  a  price,  and  that  price        Savoy 

,   ,..  •  ,  ,     .  „  and  Nice 

was  the  cession  of  Savoy   and  Nice,  with  a  population   of  jjy  ^^le 

about   700,000,   to   France.      Savoy   was   the   cradle   of   the  Treaty  of 

ruling  house  and  its  abandonment  was  a  great  humiliation,  T^"'^' 

.  .  March  24 

but  it  was,  in  Cavour's  opinion,  inevitable.      Because  of  it  ^ggQ 

Garibaldi,  a  citizen  of  Nice,  attacked  him  in  Parliament  with 
remarkable  vehemence.  "  You  have  made  me,"  he  said,  "  a 
stranger  in  the  land  of  my  birth."  "  The  act,"  replied 
Cavour  with  impressive  dignity,  "  that  has  made  this  gulf 
between  us,  was  the  most  painful  duty  of  my  life.  By 
what  I  have  felt  myself  I  know  what  Garibaldi  must  have 
felt.  If  he  refuses  me  his  forgiveness  I  cannot  reproach  him 
for  it."  Parliament  supported  Cavour,  ratifying  the  cession 
by  a  majority  of  229,  more  than  four-fifths  of  the  entire 
chamber.  The  plebiscites  in  Savoy  and  Nice  took  place  a 
few  days  later  and  resulted  in  an  almost  unanimous  vote  for 
annexation  to  France.  One  result  of  this  annexation  of  Effect 
Savoy  and  Nice  was  to  prove  very  important  for  France.  ^^^^  ^^^ 
It  alienated  England  from  Napoleon  completely.  England 
did  not  wish  to  see  her  powerful  neighbor  grow  larger.  The 
depth  and  unfortunate  effect  of  this  estrangement  Napoleon 
was  to  feel  fully  before  many  months  had  passed.  More- 
over, might  not  this  acceptance  of  Italian  territory  involve 
him  in  further  Italian  complications.'^  Was  he  not  morally 
compromised.'*  That  Cavour  appreciated  the  advantage  of 
the  situation  was  shown  by  his  reported  remark  to  the 
French  ambassador,  "  Now  you  are  our  accomplices."  What 
had  Cavour  in  mind  for  accomplices  to  do.''     He  did  not 


232      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


The 

Sicilian 
Insurrec- 
tion. 


Giuseppe 

Garibaldi, 

1807-1882. 


explain  the  cryptic  utterance,  but  every  one  knew  that  he 
was  still  far  from  his  cherished  goal.  Napoleon  III  would 
still  be  very  useful.  Sophisticated  Guizot,  then  living  in 
retirement,  made  at  about  this  time  an  observation :  "  There 
are,"  he  said,  "  two  men  upon  whom  the  eyes  of  Europe 
are  fixed,  the  Emperor  Napoleon  and  M.  de  Cavour.  The 
game  is  being  played.     I  back  M.  de  Cavour." 

THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  NAPLES 

Much  had  been  achieved  in  the  eventful  year  just  described, 
but  much  remained  to  be  achieved  before  the  unification  of 
Italy  should  be  complete.  Venetia,  the  larger  part  of  the 
Papal  States,  and  the  Kingdom  of  Naples  still  stood  outside. 
In  the  last,  however,  events  now  occurred  which  carried 
tlie  process  a  long  step  forward.  Early  in  1860  the  Sicilians 
rose  in  revolt  against  the  despotism  of  their  new  king, 
Francis  II.  This  insurrection  created  an  opportunity  for 
a  man  already  famous  but  destined  to  a  wonderful  exploit 
and  to  a  memorable  service  to  his  country,  Giuseppe  Gari- 
baldi, already  the  most  famous  military  leader  in  Italy,  and 
invested  with  a  half  mythical  character  of  invincibility  and 
daring,  the  result  of  a  very  spectacular,  romantic  career. 

Garibaldi  was  born  at  Nice  in  1807.  He  was  therefore 
two  years  younger  than  Mazzini  and  three  years  older  than 
Cavour.  Destined  by  his  parents  for  the  priesthood  he 
preferred  the  sea,  and  for  many  years  he  lived  a  roving 
and  adventurous  sailor's  life.  He  early  joined  "  Young 
Italy."  His  "military  experience  was  chiefly  in  irregular, 
guerilla  fighting.  He  took  part  in  the  unsuccessful  insur- 
rection, organized  by  Mazzini  in  Savoy  in  1834,  and  as  a 
result  was  condemned  to  death.  He  managed  to  escape  to 
South  America  where,  for  the  next  fourteen  years,  he  was 
an  exile.  He  participated  in  the  abundant  wars  of  the 
South  American  states  with  the  famous  "  Italian  Legion," 
which  he  organized  and  commanded.  Learning  of  the  up- 
rising of  1848  he  returned  to  Italy,  though  still  under  the 


I 


GIUSEPPE  GARIBALDI  233 

penalty  of  death,  and  immediately  thousands  flocked  to  the 
standard  of  the  "  hero  of  Montevideo  "  to  fight  under  him 
against  the  Austrians.  After  the  failure  of  that  campaign  The  de- 
he  went,  in  1849,  to  Rome  to  assume  the  military  defense  ^^^se  of 
of  the  republic.  When  the  city  was  about  to  fall  he  escaped 
with  four  thousand  troops,  intending  to  attack  the  Austrian 
power  in  Venetia.  French  and  Austrian  armies  pursued  him. 
He  succeeded  in  evading  them,  but  his  army  dwindled  away 
rapidly  and  the  chase  became  so  hot  that  he  was  forced 
to  escape  to  the  Adriatic.  When  he  landed  later,  his  enemies 
were  immediately  in  full  cry  again,  hunting  him  through  for- 
ests and  over  mountains  as  if  he  were  some  dangerous  game. 
It  was  a  wonderful  exploit,  rendered  tragic  by  the  death 
in  a  farm-house  near  Ravenna,  of  his  wife  Anita,  who  was  his 
companion  in  the  camp  as  in  the  home,  and  who  was  as 
high-spirited,  as  daring,  as  courageous  as  he.  Garibaldi 
finally  escaped  to  America  and  began  once  more  the  life 
of  an  exile.  But  his  story,  shot  through  and  through  with 
heroism  and  chivalry  and  romance,  moved  the  Italian  people 
to  unwonted  depths  of  enthusiasm  and  admiration. 

For  several  years  Garibaldi  was  a  wanderer,  sailing  the 
seas,  commander  of  a  Peruvian  bark.  For  some  months, 
indeed,  he  was  a  candle  maker  on  Staten  Island,  but  in  1854  leader  of 

he  returned  to  Italy  and  settled  down  as  a  farmer  on  the  '  ■^^^  Hunt- 

crs  of  tli6 
little  island  of  Caprera.     But  the  events  of  1859  once  more  ^j     ,, 

brought  him  out  of  his  retirement.     Again,  as  a  leader  of 

volunteers,   he  plunged   into   the   war  against   Austria   and 

immensely   increased   his    reputation.     He   had   become   the 

idol  of  soldiers   and   adventurous   spirits   from  one  end   of 

Italy    to    the    other.     Multitudes    were   ready   to    follow   in 

blind  confidence  wherever  he  might  lead.     His  name  was  one 

to  conjure  with.     There  now  occurred,  in  1860,  the  most 

brilliant  episode  of  his  career,  the  Sicilian  expedition  and  the 

campaign  against  the  Kingdom  of  Naples.     For  Garibaldi,  Determines 

the  most  redoubtable  warrior  of  Italy,  whose  very  name  was    °  f° 

worth  an  army,  now  decided  on  his  own  account  to  go  to 


234      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Cavour's 
dilemma 


The  Expe- 
dition of 
"The 
Thousand." 


the  aid  of  the  Sicilians  who  had  risen  in  revolt  against  their 
king,  Francis  II  of  Naples. 

His  determination  created  a  serious  problem  for  Cavour. 
The  Government  of  Piedmont  could  not  sanction  an  attack 
upon  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  with  which  it  was  at  peace, 
without  seeming  a  ruthless  aggressor  upon  an  unoffending 
state,  and  without  running  the  risk  of  a  European  inter- 
vention which  might  undo  all  the  work  thus  far  accomplished. 
In  Cavour's  opinion  the  newly  enlarged  kingdom  needed  time 
for  consolidation  before  undertaking  any  further  task.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  Garibaldi  determined  to  go  it  would  be 
dangerous  to  try  to  prevent  him,  and  yet  the  result  of  a 
successful  campaign  might  make  him  a  rival  of  Cavour  and 
might  be  used  to  checkmate  Piedmont.  It  was  imperative 
that  Piedmont  should  still  direct  the  evolution  of  Italy 
toward  her  future  destiny.  Cavour  could  not  approve  the 
expedition,  and  he  was  not  prepared  to  condemn  it.  He 
therefore  adopted  the  plan  of  secretly  conniving  at  the 
preparations,  at  the  same  time  holding  Piedmont  officially 
aloof  from  all  connection  with  it.  Thus  he  could  assure 
the  powers  that  Piedmont  had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  If  it 
should  fail,  he  could  not  be  reproached,  whereas  if  successful, 
he  might  profit  by  it.  He  had  need  of  all  his  customary 
wariness  in  this  juncture. 

On  May  5,  1860,  the  expedition  of  "  The  Thousand,"  the 
"  Red  Shirts,"  embarked  from  Genoa  in  two  steamers.  These 
were  the  volunteers,  nearly  1,150  men,  whom  Garibaldi's 
fame  had  caused  to  rush  into  the  new  adventure,  an  adventure 
that  seemed  at  the  moment  one  of  utter  folly.  The  King  of 
Naples  had  24,000  troops  in  Sicily  and  100,000  more  on 
the  mainland.  The  odds  against  success  seemed  overwlielm- 
ing.  But  fortune  favored  the  brave.  After  a  campaign 
of  a  few  weeks,  in  which  he  was  several  times  in  great  danger, 
and  was  only  saved  by  the  most  reckless  fighting,  Garibaldi 
stood  master  of  the  island,  helped  by  the  Sicilian  insurgents, 
by  volunteers  who  had  flocked  from  the  mainland,  and  by 


GARIBALDI  CONQUERS  NAPLES  235 

the  incompetency  of  the  commanders  of  the  Neapolitan 
troops.  Audacity  had  won  the  victory.  He  assumed  the 
position  of  Dictator  in  Sicily  in  the  name  of  Victor  Em- 
manuel II  (August  5,  1860). 

Garibaldi  now  crossed  the  straits  to  the  mainland  de-  Conquest 
termined  to  conquer  the  entire  Kingdom  of  Naples  (August 
19,  1860).  The  King  still  had  an  army  of  100,000  men,  of  Naples, 
but  it  had  not  even  the  strength  of  a  frail  reed.  There  was 
practically  no  bloodshed.  The  Neapolitan  Kingdom  was 
not  overthrown ;  it  collapsed.  Treachery,  desertion,  corrup- 
tion did  the  work.  On  September  6th,  Francis  II  left 
Naples  for  Gaeta  and  the  next  day  Garibaldi  entered  it  by 
rail  with  only  a  few  attendants,  and  drove  through  the  streets 
amid  a  pandemonium  of  enthusiasm.  In  less  than  five  months 
he  had  conquered  a  kingdom  of  11,000,000  people,  an 
achievement  unique  in  modern  history. 

Garibaldi  now  began  to  talk  of  pushing  on  to  Rome.  To  Garibaldi 
Cavour  the  situation  seemed  full  of  danger.  Rome  was  ,.  , 
occupied  by  a  French  garrison.  An  attack  upon  it  would  jRome. 
almost  necessarily  mean  an  attack  upon  France.  A  clash 
between  Garibaldi's  followers  and  the  French  troops  which 
were  maintaining  the  Pope's  power  in  Rome  would  probably 
bring  an  intervention  of  Napoleon,  this  time  against  the 
Italians.  There  must,  therefore,  be  no  attack  upon  Rome. 
But  while  Rome  itself  and  its  immediate  neighborhood  must 
be  preserved  inviolate  for  the  Pope,  Cavour  did  not  think 
that  the  two  eastern  provinces  of  the  Papal  States,  Umbria 
and  the  Marches,  need  be.  They  desired  annexation  to  Pied- 
mont and  were  only  kept  down  by  an  army  of  volunteers, 
drawn  from  Ireland,  Austria,  France  and  other  Catholic 
countries.  Ought  people  who  wished  to  be  free  from  the 
Pope's  rule  to  be  kept  in  subjection  by  an  army  of 
mercenaries  ? 

Cavour  felt  that  Victor  Emmanuel  must  act.     It  would  Interven- 

not  do  to  leave  Garibaldi  to  act  as  he  wished,  for  that  would  *^°"  °^ 

.      Piedmont, 
mean   an   attack  upon   Rome   and   probably   upon  Venetia, 


236      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

and  that  would  range  Italy  against,  not  only  France,  but 
Austria,  two  great  empires,  and  everything  that  had  been 
so  painfully  accomplished  would  be  imperiled.  To  prevent 
Garibaldi's  advance  which,  once  under  way,  would  be  beyond 
control,  Victor  Emmanuel  must  take  charge  of  the  revolu- 
tion in  southern  Italy.  Yet  if  Victor  Emmanuel's  troops 
entered  the  Papal  States  all  the  Catholic  countries  of  Europe, 
outraged  at  the  despoiling  of  the  Pope,  might  intervene 
and  undo  what  had  been  already  done.  Cavour  believed 
that  if  he  left  the  Pope  unmolested  in  Rome,  Napo- 
leon would  have  no  objection  to  the  rest  of  the  Papal  States 
going  into  the  new  kingdom,  if  the  population  desired  it. 
In  this  estimate  he  was  correct.  Understanding  finally  that 
Napoleon  approved,  if  only  the  thing  were  done  quickly, 
Victor  Emmanuel's  army  crossed  into  the  Papal  States  and 
defeated  the  Papal  troops  at  Castelfidardo  (September  18th, 
1860).  They  then  entered  the  territory  of  Naples.  The 
climax  to  all  this  unification  movement  was  now  at  hand. 
On  October  11,  1860,  Parliament  voted  overwhelmingly  in 
favor  of  the  annexation  of  all  the  provinces  in  central  and 
southern  Italy  whose  people  should  declare  in  favor  of  it 
by  plebiscite.  The  plebiscite  took  place  in  the  Kingdom  of 
The    annex-  Naples  on  October  21-22,  I860,  and  was  overwhelmingly  in 

0       e  f^YQj.    q£    annexation.       On    the    mainland    approximately 
Kingdom  ^^  "^ 

of  Naples       1,300,000  voted  yes,  10,000  no  ;  in  Sicily  432,000  yes,  600  no. 

and  of  A  few  days  later  the  Pope's  former  subjects  in  the  Marches 

Umbria  and  ^.g^gj  f^^,  annexation  by  133,000  to  1,200;  and  in  Urabria 

the 

Marches         ^J  97,000  to  380.     Majorities   so   staggering  showed  how 

unanimous  was  the  desire  for  unification. 

After  having  conquered  the  Papal  army  at  Castelfidardo, 

Victor   Emmanuel   had   advanced   with   his    army   into    the 

Kingdom   of  Naples   for   the  double   purpose  of  defeating 

the    army    still    under    Francis    II    at    Capua    and    Gaeta, 

which    Garibaldi    had    not    been    able    to    conquer,    and    of 

taking  the  direction  of  affairs   of  state   out   of  the  hands 

of  Garibaldi  who,  successful  in  war,  was  eminently  lacking 


TIIK  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY  PROCLAIMED        237 

ill   political  .siigfic-itj.      It   was   imperative   that  Victor  Ein- 

iiiiimal's   autliority   should   be   supreme   in   Naples,   that   he 

mi^ht  control  the  evolution  of  events.     Both  purposes  were 

ni)w    achieved.      The    troops    of    Francis    II    were    defeated 

at    C'aj)ua    on     thf    first    and    second    of    November,    and  Siege  of 

the    siege    of    Gaeta,    where    Francis    took    his    last    stand,  ^^^^*' 

began. 

Garibaldi  had  demanded  the  resignation  of  Cavour  from 
Victor  I'iiiimanuel  and  seemed  disposed  to  insist  upon  certain 
conditions  before  handing  over  his  con(juest  to  him.  The 
King's  attitude  was  firm.  He  declined  to  consider  the  dis- 
missal of  Cavour.  Moreover,  now  that  Victor  Emmanuel  was 
himself  in  the  Kingdom  of  Na})les  with  a  large  army,  and  was 
backed  by  the  vote  of  the  Parliament  and  the  plebiscites 
favoring  annexation.  Garibaldi  yielded.  On  November  7th, 
Victor  Enunaiuiel  and  Garibaldi  drove  together  through  the 
streets  of  Naples.  The  latter  refused  all  rewards  and  honors 
and  with  only  a  little  money  and  a  bag  of  seed  beans  for  his 
farm  he  sailed  away  to  Caprera.  Gaeta  fill  on  February 
l;3,  18G1,  and  the  King  fled  to  Rome,  entering  upon  a 
life  of  exile  which  was  to  end  only  with  his  death  in 
1894. 

On  the  18th  of  February,  1861,  a  new  Parliament,  repre-  The 

scntiiiff  all  Italy  except  Venetia  and  Rome,  met  in  Turin.    ^^^^  °°^ 
r.  '.  7  .  ^.  of  Italy 

The  Kingdom  of  Sardinia  now  gave  way  to  the  Kingdom  of  proclaimed. 

Italy,  proclaimed  March  17th.  Victor  Emmanuel  II  was  de- 
clared "  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  will  of  the  nation,  King 
of  Italy." 

A  new  kingdom,  comprising  a  population  of  about  twenty- 
two  millions,  had  arisen  during  a  period  of  eighteen  months, 
and  now  took  its  place  among  the  powers  of  Europe.  The 
Pope  refused  to  recognize  this  "  creation  of  revolution," 
and  excommunicated  the  criminal  invaders  of  his  states. 
Victor  Emmanuel  he  denounced  as  "  forgetful  of  every  reli- 
gious principle,  despising  every  right,  trampling  upon  every 
law."     Against  his  assumption  of  the  title  of  King  of  Italy, 


238      CREATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

with  which  he  has  sought  to  seal  his  "  sacrilegious  usurpa- 
tions," Pius  IX  formally  protested.^ 

The  But  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  was  still  incomplete.     Venetia 

ing  om        ^^,^g  g^-|j  ^ygj-j-ig^jj  g^jj^j  ^jjg  Patrimony  of  St.  Peter  was  still 

still  in-  .  ,  -^    _ 

complete.       subject  to  the  Pope.     This  was  a  strip  along  the  western 

coast,  between  Tuscanj'  and  Naples,  twenty  or  thirty  miles 
wide,  and  included  the  incomparable  city  of  Rome.  The 
Pope's  power  rested  on  the  French  garrison.  The  new 
Kingdom,  however,  was  not  strong  enough  to  take  Venetia 
from  Austria,  nor  disposed  to  defy  the  Emperor  Napoleon 
by  an  attack  upon  Rome. 
The  There  were,   indeed,   some   Italian   nationalists   who   were 

question  o  ^rjii|j;,g  \^q  forego  permanently  the  possession  of  Rome  as 
the  capital.  D'Azeglio  called  the  desire  for  it  simply  "  a 
classical  fantasticality."  Moreover,  it  was  "  a  malarial 
town  fit  only  for  a  museum."  Not  so  thought  Cavour,  who 
believed  that  "  without  Rome  there  was  no  Italy."  He 
declared  that  now  that  national  independence  had  been 
secured  the  great  object  must  be  "to  make  the  Eternal 
City,  on  which  rest  twenty-five  centuries  of  glory,  the  splen- 
did capital  of  the  Italian  Kingdom."  The  position  of  the 
capital  was  not  to  be  determined  by  the  character  of  the 
climate  or  topography,  but  by  moral  reasons  and  the  moral 
primacy  of  Rome  among  all  Italian  cities  was  unquestionable. 
They  must  have  Rome,  but  on  two  conditions,  that  France 
should  consent  and  that  the  Catholic  world  should  have 
no  just  ground  to  believe  that  it  meant  the  subjection  of 
the  Pope.  Cavour  hoped  that  the  Pope  would  be  willing 
to  give  up  his  temporal  power  on  the  guarantee  that  his 
spiritual  authority  should  be  carefully  guarded  and  even 
extended.  The  principle  of  "  a  free  church  in  a  free  state  " 
absorbed  his  thought  at  this  time.  At  his  request  Parlia- 
ment voted  the  principle  that  Rome  should  be  the  capital  of 
Italy,  a  solemn  official  declaration  from  which  there  could 
be  no  retreat.  This  was  Cavour's  last  great  act,  for  he 
*  Robinson  and  Beard,  Readings  in  Modern  European  History,  II,  130. 


THE  DEATH  OF  CAVOUR  239 

now  fell  ill.     Overwork,  the  extraordinary  pressure  under 
which   he   had   for   months   been   laboring,   brought   on    in- 
somnia ;  finally  fever  developed  and  he  died  on  the  morning  Death  of 
of  June  6th,  1861,  in  the  very  prime  of  life,  for  he  was  only  Cavour. 
fifty-one  years  of  age. 

"  Cavour,"  said  Lord  Palmerston,  in  the  British  House  of 
Commons,  "  left  a  name  '  to  point  a  moral  and  adorn  a 
tale.'  The  moral  was,  that  a  man  of  transcendent  talent, 
indomitable  industry,  inextinguishable  patriotism,  could  over- 
come difficulties  wliich  seemed  insurmountable,  and  confer 
the  greatest,  the  most  inestimable  benefits  on  his  country. 
The  tale  with  which  his  memory  would  be  associated  was  the 
most  extraordinary,  the  most  romantic,  in  the  annals  of  the 
world.  A  people  who  had  seemed  dead  had  arisen  to  new 
and  vigorous  life,  breaking  the  spell  which  bound  it,  and 
showing  itself  worthy  of  a  new  and  splendid  destiny."  ^ 

Throughout  his  life  Cavour  remained  faithful  to  his  funda- 
mental political  principle,  government  by  parliament  and 
by  constitutional  forms.  Urged  at  various  times  to  assume 
a  dictatorship  he  said  he  had  no  confidence  in  dictatorships. 
"  I  always  feel  strongest,"  he  said,  "  when  Parliament  is 
sitting."  "  I  cannot  betray  my  origin,  deny  the  principles  of 
all  my  life,"  he  wrote  in  a  private  letter  not  intended  for 
the  public.  "  I  am  the  son  of  liberty  and  to  her  I  owe  all 
that  I  am.  If  a  veil  is  to  be  placed  on  her  statue,  it  is  not 
for  me  to  do  it." 

*  Quoted  by  Cesaresco:  Cavour,  216. 


CHAPTER  XI 
BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 

Reaction  In  1848  and  1849  the  reformers  of  Germany,  as  of  other 

^x    ^^.'^Ifr^  countries,  had  made  a  vigorous   effort  to  effect  profound 
after    1849.  .  ,  .  .     ®  .... 

alterations  in  the  political  and  social  institutions   of  their 

country.  Momentarily  successful,  their  day  of  power  proved 
brief,  and  by  1850  the  old  authorities  were  once  more  solidly 
established  in  their  old  positions.  A  practical  absolutism 
reigned  again  throughout  most  of  central  Europe.  In  place 
of  the  German  unity  so  long  desired  and  for  which  the 
Frankfort  Parliament  had  struggled  with  such  earnest  futil- 
ity, the  old  Diet  of  1815,  slow,  cumbrous,  impotent  save 
for  repression,  quietly  slipped  back  into  the  familiar,  well- 
worn  grooves,  resuming  its  sessions  in  May  1851,  and  de- 
voting its  attention  to  the  removal  of  the  debris  left  by  the 
revolutionary  hurricane  which  had  just  swept  by.  A  period 
of  reaction  began  again,  even  more  far-reaching  in  its  scope 
than  that  which  had  followed  the  Congress  of  Vienna  of 
1815.  This  period  may  be  considered  to  have  lasted  from 
the  diplomatic  defeat  of  Prussia  at  Olmiitz  in  1850  to  1858, 
when  William  I  assumed  the  Regency  of  Prussia,  and 
to  1859  when  Austria,  now  as  formerly  the  strong  tower 
of  ultra-conservatism,  suffered  an  important  diminution  of 
power  and  prestige  in  the  military  defeats  in  Italy  which  have 
been  described  above. 

During  this  period  the  work  of  1848  and  1849  was  undone 
wherever  possible,  and  a  persecution  of  Liberals  carried  out 
so  thoroughly  that  tens  of  thousands  left  the  country.  This 
inspired  some  alarm  at  first,  but  consolation  was  found  in 
the  thought  that  the  removal  of  these  disturbers  of  the 
public  mind  would  only  leave  the  fatherland  politically  in 

240 


PRUSSIA  RECEIVES  A  CONSTITUTION      241 

peace.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  large  German  emigra- 
tion to  the  United  States,  which  has  since  attained  such 
impressive  proportions  and  been  attended  by  such  im- 
portant consequences.  Austria  and  Prussia  took  the  lead 
in  the  familiar  work  of  repression. 

The  King  of  Prussia,  Frederick  William  IV,  had,  as  we  Prussia  a 

have  seen,  granted  a  Constitution  and  created  a  Parliament  ^.      ,    "  ^ 

'  °  ...  tional  but 

during  the  recent  convulsion,  but  it  quickly  became  evident  not  a  par- 

that  he  had  no  intention  of  establishing  the  parliamentary  liamentary 
system  as  it  had  been  developed  in  England.  He  did  not  for  ^  ^  ®' 
a  moment  propose  to  weaken  the  royal  power  by  dividing  it 
with  any  assembly,  even  with  one  which,  like  this,  represented 
only  the  rich.  No  new  taxes  or  laws  might  be  passed  without 
the  consent  of  the  new  chamber,  but  old  ones  might  be 
continued  without  that  consent.  The  Chamber  had  no  con- 
trol whatever  over  the  ministry.  With  machinery  like  this 
Parliament  could  not  have  prevented  reaction  even  had  it 
so  desired;  but  constituted  as  it  was,  it  became  itself  one 
of  the  instruments  of  reaction. 

That  reaction  began  at  once.  The  King  was  urged  to 
abolish  the  Constitution  outright,  but  this,  mindful  of  his 
oath,  he  never  did.  However,  a  method  of  "  interpreting  " 
it  virtually  achieved  the  same  end.  The  ministers  gained 
great  skill  in  the  art  of  ruling  with  the  Constitution  against 
the  Constitution.  Laws  which  they  disapproved  were  simply 
not  executed  or  their  contents  were  by  "  interpretation " 
molded  to  the  heart's  desire.  The  Constitution  had  pro- 
claimed the  right  of  association  and  public  meeting,  but  as 
a  matter  of  fact  this  right  was  permitted  only  to  those 
favorable  to  the  Government.  Public  meetings  were  watched 
by  agents  of  the  Government,  who,  on  the  least  pretext, 
might  dissolve  them.  Everywhere  the  police  were  active 
and  unscrupulous.  Arbitrary  arrest  and  imprisonment  were 
frequent.  A  Berlin  police  regulation  in  1851  permitted  the  The  police 
application  to  prisoners  of  torture,  deprivation  of  light,  system. 
the    strait- j  acket,    and    corporal    punishment    up    to    forty 


242  BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 

strokes.  Men  who  were  supposed  to  be  democrats  were 
hounded  in  every  way.  "  No  lawyer  would  give  me  work," 
wrote  one  of  them ;  "  no  business  man  had  the  courage  to 
seek  the  aid  of  my  legal  knowledge ;  no  editor  would  consent 
to  publish  a  book  of  mine."  With  great  difficulty  he  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  out  three  novels.  At  once  the  Govern- 
ment forbade  their  introduction  into  public  libraries,  forbade 
their  sale.  Certain  physicians  were  denied  the  certificates 
necessary  to  the  practice  of  their  profession  because,  as 
democrats,  their  "  morality "  could  not  be  guaranteed. 
Abuses  of  power  succeeded  each  other  rapidly.  "  God  in 
Heaven,"  wrote  Bunsen,  "  what  a  frightful  situation  for 
Germany !  "  The  mails  were  not  respected.  Postmen  were 
ordered  not  to  deliver  letters  to  Liberals.  Even  reactionaries 
themselves  felt  the  pinch  at  times.  "  I  cannot  write  you 
much  about  politics,"  Bismarck  informed  his  wife,  "  for  all 
letters  are  opened."  And  again,  "  Do  not  forget,  when 
3^ou  write  me,  that  your  letters  are  not  read  simply  by 
myself  but  are  also  read  at  the  post  office,  by  spies  of 
every  feather;  be,  without  exception,  prudent  in  your 
remarks." 

The  censorship  abolished  by  the  Constitution  was  not  re- 
stored, but  the  same  end  was  otherwise  achieved.  Methods 
were  followed  in  this  respect,  as  in  many  others,  which  were 
copied  from  Napoleon  III,  who  was  applying  them  success- 
fully in  France.  Much  ingenious  reasoning  was  displayed 
at  times  by  government  officials.  In  one  case  the  police 
Control  announced  that  the  law  permitted  the  publication  of  news- 

papers but  not  their  sale,  and  thus  one  Liberal  paper  was 
suppressed.  By  such  means  virtual  absolutism  was  restored 
in  Prussia  after  the  liberal  awakening  of  1848  and  1849. 
No  relief  was  found  in  the  Chamber,  for  the  Government 
secured  large  and  dependent  majorities  there,  by  the  same 
methods  which  Napoleon  III  used  in  France,  by  official 
candidacies  and  by  various  forms  of  bribery  and  intimida- 
tion.    The    system    was    thoroughly    established.     Prussia, 


of  the 
press 


ECONOMIC  EVOLUTION  OF  PRUSSIA        243 

with  a  Constitution,  was  really  ruled  without  regard  to  its 
provisions. 

The  governing  forces  were  the  King  and  the  landed  nobil-  ^^®  P"''^" 
ity.  These  were  the  "  Junkers,"  whom  Bismarck  later  called  ^j^^g 
the  "  pariahs  of  modern  civilization,"  hide-bound  conserva- 
tives, completely  dominated  by  the  ideas  of  old-time  feudal- 
ism. The  House  of  Lords  was  now  one  of  their  seats  of 
power.  Indignant  at  the  former  freeing  of  their  serfs  they 
labored  with  much  success  to  regain  old  rights,  such  as  the 
police  power  on  their  estates,  and  hunting  privileges.  They 
had  a  monopoly  of  the  higher  grades  in  the  army.  All  these 
measures  irritated  various  classes  of  society  and  unrest,  not 
peace,  was  the  ominous  result.  No  wonder  that  Bernhardi  ex- 
claimed, "  The  Constitution  is  nothing  but  a  name,"  and  that 
another  who  lived  through  it  all  wrote  a  little  later,  "  The 
period  from  184^9  to  1858  was  the  most  shameful  in  the  his- 
tory of  Prussia." 

But  signs  were  not  lacking  of  the  dawning  of  a  new  day. 
The  economic  evolution  of  the  country  was  proceeding  on 
the  whole  unimpeded  and  quietly,  and  that  evolution  tended 
directly  toward  liberty,  for  it  meant  the  transformation 
of  Germany  from  an  agricultural,  feudal,  and  patriarchal 
into  a  great  industrial  nation.  Even  the  Government  itself 
facilitated  this  transformation  which  was  in  the  end  to  be 
so  prejudicial  to  its  system,  imitating  in  this,  as  in  so 
many  other  respects,  the  example  of  Napoleon  III,  who 
thought  that  the  best  way  to  make  people  forget  their  loss 
of  liberty  was  to  enable  them  to  get  rich.  But  in  the  main 
this  transformation  was  effected,  not  by  governmental  meas- 
ures, but  by  the  unseen,  unconscious  operation  of  the  ordinary 
laws  of  business. 

This    economic    transformation    is    the    most    important  Economic 

feature  of  German  history  in  the  decade  from  1850  to  I860,  ^ 

■^  ^  ,  .       ,    formation. 

for  it  began  the  creation  of  that  industrial  Germany  which  is 
so  tremendous  a  fact  in  the  world  of  to-day.  This  transforma- 
tion was   apparent  in  many  ways.     Rich  deposits   of  gold 


244. 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Industrial 
develop- 
ment. 


had  been  discovered  in  California  in  1848,  and  in  Australia 
in  1851.  It  has  been  estimated  that  the  world's  production 
of  the  precious  metal  was  about  four  times  as  great  in  1856 
as  in  184T.  The  increase  in  the  quantity  of  the  medium  of 
exchange  had,  among  other  important  results,  for  Germany 
this,  the  sudden  creation  of  a  large  number  of  banks  and 
business  corporations.  In  Bavaria,  for  instance,  only  six  stock 
companies  Avith  a  capital  of  five  millions  had  been  founded 
between  1839  and  1848;  but  from  1849  to  1858  forty-four 
were  established  with  a  capital  of  one  hundred  and  seventy 
millions.  The  capital  of  the  banks  created  in  Germany 
from  1853  to  1857  aggregated  about  750  millions.  All  this 
meant  an  immense  increase  in  the  resources  available  for 
industry. 

Germany  had  for  various  reasons  remained  industrially 
far  behind  neighboring  countries,  particularly  France  and 
England.  Her  population  was  largely  rural,  two-thirds  of 
her  inhabitants  Avere  agriculturalists.  Whatever  industries 
existed  were  small.  There  were  very  few  large  cities.  Ber- 
lin, the  capital  of  Prussia,  had  a  population  of  about  450,000, 
and  in  the  entire  Confederation  there  were  only  six  or  seven 
cities  of  more  than  100,000  inhabitants.  Both  exports  and 
imports  were  few.  Germany  sold  little  but  raw  materials. 
All  this  was  rapidly  changed.  Capital  being  easily  pro- 
cured, hundreds  of  new  enterprises  were  started.  Particu- 
ularly  was  the  exploitation  of  the  immense  mineral  resources 
of  the  country,  thus  far  largely  neglected,  undertaken  with 
great  energy.  Coal  mines  were  opened  up,  factories  and 
foundries  arose  on  all  sides.  Alfred  Krupp  made  the  steel 
foundry,  begun  by  his  father  in  1810,  one  of  the  most  famous 
establishments  of  the  kind  in  the  world.  Workmen,  attracted 
by  higher  wages  than  could  be  procured  in  agriculture,  flocked 
to  the  cities,  which  increased  rapidly.  Economists  state  that 
the  period  of  speculation  succeeding  the  revolution  of  1848 
was  the  most  remarkable  Germany  has  ever  seen.  The  Ger- 
mans took  naturally  to  modern  business,  showing  their  usual 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  BOURGEOISIE  245 

qualities  of  patience,  order,  adaptability,  and  an  abounding 
faith  in  the  advantages  to  be  derived  from  the  application 
to  economic  life  of  the  discoveries  of  science  and  from  the  use 
of  scientific  methods.  The  mileage  of  railroads  rapidly  in- 
creased, in  Prussia  alone  in  a  few  years  from  114  miles  to  over 
800,  and  the  number  of  travelers  increased  fourfold. 

All  this  had  important  political  and  intellectual  conse-  Rise  of  a 
quences.  It  meant  the  rise  of  a  modern  capitalist  class,  a  '^^s^lt^y 
rich  bourgeoisie,  which  would  insist  and  which  would  have  j^^g 
the  power  to  insist  that  the  state  should  no  longer  be  run 
along  medieval  lines  for  the  benefit  of  a  feudal  monarchy, 
and  a  feudal  nobility  of  landlords.  And  the  result  of  this 
economic  revolution  was  to  broaden  men's  horizon,  and  to 
weaken  the  local  states-rights  feeling.  Manufacturers  and 
merchants  were  anxious  for  the  widest  market,  and  impatient 
of  laws  and  institutions  that  hindered  business.  They  saw 
the  inconveniences  that  flowed  from  the  existing  political 
organization  of  Germany,  the  petty  state  animosities  and 
the  powerlessness  of  the  Confederation  abroad.  They  wished 
a  reorganization  of  the  country  so  that  Germany  should 
have  the  weight  in  international  affairs  that  was  necessary  for 
the  development  of  her  wealth.  That  they  might  compete 
in  the  world  markets  they  must  have  the  support  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. The  Government  of  the  Confederation  was  impo- 
tent. This  growing  class  therefore  would  hail  with  enthu- 
siasm any  attempt  to  strengthen  it.  Thus  business  was 
undermining  the  established  order  in  politics.  The  require- 
ments of  modern  industrialism  were  potent  factors  in  the 
ultimate  creation  of  German  unity. 

At  the  same  time  a  similar  trend  was  unmistakable  in  Intellectual 
the  intellectual  evolution  of  Germany,  and  was  shown  in  ^"^^"y* 
the  various  fields  of  theology,  science,  history  and  litera- 
ture. From  the  romantic,  the  metaphysical,  the  specula- 
tive people  they  had  been,  Germans  were  becoming  practical, 
positive,  realist.  The  boldest  innovations  in  the  economic 
life  were  matched  by  the  boldest  discoveries  in  science.     A 


24<G 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Influence 
of  events 
in  Italy 
upon 
German 
thought. 


The 

National 

Union. 


new  heaven  and  a  new  earth  were  taking  the  place  of  the 
old.  The  German  intellect  was  showing  its  enterprise,  its 
daring  in  every  line,  and  was  heaping  up  great  riches.  An  in- 
tellectual environment  was  being  created  in  which  the  great 
realist  of  the  century  in  Germany  could  breathe  and  work 
successfully.  It  would  be  difficult  to  show  all  this  except 
at  length,  and  this  would  be  impossible  in  the  present  trea- 
tise. But  the  fact  remains  that  Schopenhauer  in  philoso- 
phy, and  Helmholtz  and  Virchow  in  science,  were  laying 
intellectual  foundations  for  the  unification  of  Gennany  and 
the  hegemony  of  Pinissia.^  The  liistorians  of  the  period, 
Sybel,  Treitschke,  Droysen,  Freytag,  produced  histories  in 
abundance  which  were  really  great  patriotic  pamphlets, 
therefore  less  valuable  as  histories  than  as  organs  for 
shaping  public  opinion  toward  great  and  decisive  action  in 
the  field  of  politics.  They  were  vigorously  patriotic, 
nationalistic  in  tone,  Prussian  in  sympathy.  Even  Momm- 
sen  and  Curtius,  who  wrote  in  the  field  of  ancient  history, 
distinctly  revealed  the  current  preconceptions  and  aspira- 
tions of  the  day.' 

Opinion  in  Gennany  was  greatly  stimulated  by  the  events 
in  Italy.  The  Italian  war  of  1859,  and  the  formation  of 
the  Italian  Kingdom  exerted  a  remarkable  influence  upon 
events  outside  of  the  peninsula.  Here  was  a  successful 
application  of  the  doctrine  of  nationalities.  Might  not  the 
precedent  receive  wider  application.''  Poland,  Denmark, 
Germany  felt  a  powerful  impulsion  from  beyond  the  Alps. 
This  influence  was  shown  in  the  very  month  of  Villafranca. 
For  July  1859  saw  the  genesis  in  Hanover  of  a  new  patriotic 
society,  called  the  National  Union,  whose  purpose  was 
to  create  a  national  party  for  the  purpose  of  "  achiev- 
ing the  unity  of  the  fatherland  and  the  development  of 
its  liberties."  The  society  soon  spread  throughout  Germany. 
Unity  and  liberty  were  its  watchwords.     Did  not  the  Italian 

*  Denis,   La   Fondation   de  TEmpire   AUemand,   Chap.   III. 
^Guilland,  L'AUemagne  Nouvelle  et  ses   Historians. 


WILLIAM  I  OF  PRUSSIA  247 

campaign  prove  the  necessity  of  the  former?  If  Napoleon 
III  could  invade  Italy,  might  he  not  with  equal  ease  invade 
Germany?  There  must  be  a  thorough  military  reorganiza- 
tion so  that  Germany  should  be  safe  from  possible  aggres- 
sion, and  to  accomplish  this  the  Confederation,  as  a  whole, 
must  first  be  reorganized.  Cavour  was,  in  the  opinion  of 
the  members  of  the  National  Union,  the  model  whom  German 
statesmen  should  imitate.  Prussia  ought  to  do  for  Germany 
what  Piedmont  had  done  for  Italy.  Let  her  become  frankly 
liberal,  then  Liberals  everywhere  would  support  her,  and  she 
could  make  the  fatherland.  This  was  not  the  method  fol- 
lowed, as  we  shall  see.  Germany  was  made  by  an  autocratic 
not  by  a  liberal  government.  And  the  reason  was  that  the 
conservative  class  was  stronger  in  Germany  than  in  Italy, 
and  happened  to  find  two  able  leaders,  William  I  and 
Bismarck,  as  the  Liberals  in  Italy  had  found  two  of  their 
kind,  Victor  Emmanuel  and  Cavour.  Though  the  National 
Liberals  in  Germany  influenced  public  opinion  extensively 
and  thus  facilitated  in  the  end  the  rise  of  German  unity, 
they  clashed  with  those  who  actually  carried  out  the  work, 
and  were  themselves  defeated.  The  achievement  of  German 
unity  was  to  be  no  imitation  of  an  Italian  example. 

The  full  import  of  all  these  changes  in  the  economic  life 
and  in  the  intellectual  outlook,  this  fennentation  of  ideas, 
was  shortly  to  be  shown  in  the  reign,  destined  to  prove  most 
illustrious,  of  William  I  of  Prussia.  The  preliminary  stage 
was  over,  the  period  of  action  was  about  to  begin. 

In  1857,  Frederick  William  IV  became,  by  reason  of  mental  William  I, 
disease,  incapable  of  administering  the  Government.  As  the  ^*^'-^^^^- 
King  had  no  son,  his  brother,  William  I,  became  his  represent- 
ative. The  following  year  William  became  Regent,  which 
gave  him  complete  independence  of  action.  It  was  recognized 
that  the  King  would  never  recover.  He  died  in  January 
1861,  and  William  became  sovereign.  The  accession  of  the 
Hew  prince  was  hailed  with  great  enthusiasm,  so  deep  and 


248  BIS:MARCK  and  GERMAN  UNITY 

general  had  been  the  disappointment  in  Prussia  over  the 
timidity,  the  reactionary  character,  and  the  fruitlessness  of 
his  predecessor's  rule.  The  new  ruler  was  intellectually  the 
very  antipodes  of  his  brother,  slow,  solid,  persistent,  firm, 
rather  than  brilliant  and  imaginative.  Common  sense  was  his 
strongest  quality  as  versatility  had  been  that  of  his  brother. 
William  was  the  son  of  the  famous  Queen  Louise,  was  bom 
in  1797,  and  had  served  in  the  campaign  against  Napoleon 
in  1814.  He  was  now  over  sixty  years  of  age.  His  entire 
lifetime  had  been  spent  in  the  army,  which  he  loved  passion- 
ately. In  military  matters  his  thorough  knowledge  and 
competence  were  recognized.  He  had  resented  deeply  the 
action  of  his  brother  at  Olmiitz,  action  dictated  by  the 
military  weakness  of  Prussia.  William  believed  that  Prus- 
sia's destiny  depended  upon  her  army.  The  army  was  neces- 
sary for  his  pui*pose,  which  was  to  put  Prussia  at  the  head 
of  Gennany.  "  Now,"  he  had  written  in  1849,  "  whoever 
wishes  to  rule  Germany  must  conquer  it;  and  that  cannot  be 
done  with  phrases."  The  mobilization  of  the  Prussian  troops 
in  1859  convinced  him  more  than  ever  that  the  army  needed 
strengthening.  He  now  brought  foi'ward  a  definite  military 
programme. 

The  Prussia  had  been  the  first  state,  and  was  thus  far  the  only 

one,  to  adopt  the  principle  that  all  male  citizens  must  be 
soldiers.  By  the  law  of  1814  universal  compulsory  three 
years'  service  in  the  active  army  was  established.  The 
soldier  then  passed  into  the  reserve  for  two  years,  which 
meant  that  he  would  be  summoned  to  military  exercise  for 
several  weeks  each  year;  he  then  passed  into  the  landwehr 
for  several  years  (from  the  ages  of  twenty-six  to  thirty- 
nine),  receiving  some  little  training  intermittently.  Then 
he  passed  into  the  landsturm,  where  he  remained  until  the 
age  of  fifty,  to  be  called  out  only  in  the  case  of  direst  neces- 
sity. This  system  had  been  in  existence  for  forty-six  years, 
with  only  slight  modification.  But  the  system  had  not,  in 
practice,  been  thoroughly  carried  out.     No  account  had  been 


Prussian 
army 


ARMY  REFORMS  249 

taken  of  the  increase  of  population.  In  1820  the  popula- 
tion of  Prussia  was  about  12,000,000.  The  number  of 
yearly  recruits  had  been  fixed  at  40,000  and  regiments 
for  that  number  had  been  estabhshed.  But  in  I860  the 
population  was  about  18,000,000,  and  if  all  able-bodied 
men  of  military  age  were  recruited,  as  by  law  they  should 
be,  there  would  be  63,000.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  The 

the  number  of  recruits  had  been  kept  at  40,000,  which  meant  °    ^^^  °^J 

^  service  not 

that  many  thousand  young  men,  by  law  required  to  serve  enforced, 
three  years  under  the  colors,  had  been  excused  in  practice 
from  service,   and  that  others   had  been  required  to   serve 
only  two  years.     This  kept  the  ai-my  down  to  about  130,000 
active  soldiers  on  a  peace  footing,  215,000  in  time  of  war. 

William  I  believed  such  a  condition  full  of  danger  for 
Prussia.  Considering  himself  primarily  a  soldier,  the  first 
soldier  of  Prussia,  and  responsible  for  her  defense,  he  re- 
solved to  carry  through  certain  reforms.  In  1859  he  ap- 
pointed Albrecht  von  Roon  Minister  of  War,  in  politics  a 
convinced  reactionary,  in  military  matters  a  man  of  great  Army 
knowledge  and  ability.  In  1860  a  plan  for  the  reform  of 
the  army  was  submitted  to  the  Prussian  Parliament.  Hence- 
forth the  law  requiring  universal  military  service  was  to  be 
rigorously  enforced. 

This  would  mean   63,000   recruits   each  year  instead   of 

40,000,    and   would   give   an    army   of   190,000   in   time  of 

peace,  450,000  in  time  of  Avar,  the  service  in  the  reserve  being 

lengthened    from    two    to    four   years.     Thus    the    military 

forces  of  Prussia  would  be  doubled.     To  do  this  necessitated 

the  creation  of  new  regiments  with  their  officers  and  colors. 

This  would  involve  an  increase  in  the  budget,  which  could  Opposition 

only  be   sanctioned   bv   Parliament.      But   the    Chamber   of  _,      . 
•^  -^  _      _  .  Chamber. 

Deputies  was  from  the  beginning  opposed  to  this  change, 
though  it  voted  appropriations  once  on  the  understand- 
ing that  they  were  provisional  only.  The  Government 
acted  as  if  they  were  permanent.  In  1862  the  Chamber  re- 
fused the  moneys  entirely.     This  meant  that  the  new  regi- 


S50 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Determina- 
tion of 
William  I. 


Otto  von 

Bismarck- 

Schon- 

hausen, 

1815-1898. 


ments  must  be  disbanded,  their  officers  dismissed,  that  what 
had  been  done  must  be  undone,  that  the  royal  plan  of  army 
reform  must  be  abandoned,  although  it  had  been  put  into 
force  at  least  provisionally,  that  the  Government  must,  in 
a  most  conspicuous  matter,  retrace  its  steps.  Over  this 
question  a  bitter  and  prolonged  controversy  arose  between 
the  Crown  and  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  each  side  growing 
stifFer  as  the  contest  proceeded.  The  King  was  absolutely 
resolved  not  to  abate  one  jot  from  his  demands.  He  be- 
lieved that  the  organization  of  the  army,  and  the  system 
of  national  defense  belonged  exclusively  to  himself,  as  they 
had  undoubtedly  to  previous  Pinissian  kings ;  that  the  fact 
that  in  1850  a  Constitution  had  come  into  existence  creating 
a  Parliament  in  no  respect  altered  the  situation ;  that  indeed 
the  right  had  been  expressly  confirmed  by  that  Constitution ; 
that  Parliament  was  in  duty  bound  to  vote  all  appropriations 
necessary  for  him  to  discharge  his  duties  as  supreme  ex- 
ecutive and  commander-in-chief.  Parliament,  on  the  other 
hand,  held  that  by  the  Constitution  all  grants  must  be 
voted  by  it,  that  if  it  were  bound  to  vote  them  on  the  mere 
demand  of  the  King  its  discretion  and  power  would  simply 
disappear  entirely.  Parliament  must,  in  the  interests  of 
the  people,  insist  upon  the  preservation  intact  of  its  dele- 
gated powers,  and  the  control  of  the  purse  was  the  chief 
of  these.  A  deadlock  ensued.  The  King  was  urged  to 
abolish  Parliament  altogether.  This  he  would  not  do  be- 
cause he  had  swoni  to  support  the  Constitution  which  es- 
tablished it.  He  thought  of  abdicating.  He  never  thought 
of  abandoning  the  reform.  He  had  written  out  his  abdica- 
tion and  signed  it,  and  it  was  lying  upon  his  desk  when 
he  at  last  consented  to  call  to  the  ministry  as  a  final  experi- 
ment a  new  man,  known  for  his  boldness,  his  independence, 
his  devotion  to  the  monarchy.  Otto  von  Bismarck.  Bis- 
marck was  appointed  President  of  the  Ministry  September 
23,  1862:  on  that  very  day  the  Chamber  rejected  anew 
the  credits  asked  for  by  the  King  for  the  new  regiments. 


BISMARCK'S  POLITICAL  PRINCIPLES       251 

The  conflict  entered  upon  its  most  acute  phase  and  a  new 
era  began  for  Prussia  and  for  the  world. 

In  this  interview  Bismarck  told  the  King  frankly  that  he 
was  willing  to  carry  out  his  policy  whether  the  Parliament 
agreed  to  it  or  not.  "  I  will  rather  perish  with  the  King," 
he  said,  "  than  forsake  your  Majesty  in  the  contest  with 
parliamentary  government."  His  boldness  determined  the 
King  to  tear  up  the  paper  containing  his  abdication  and  to 
continue  the  struggle  with  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 

The  man  who  now  entered  upon  the  stage  of  European  Bismarck's 

politics  was  one  of  the  most  original  and  salient  characters  ^ 

^  »  career. 

of  his  century.  Born  in  1815,  he  came  of  a  noble  family  in 
Brandenburg,  and  as  a  young  man  seemed  completely  imbued 
with  all  the  narrowness  of  his  order,  its  vigorous  insistence 
upon  the  preservation  of  existing  institutions,  its  tenacious 
adherence  to  forms  of  belief  that  had  long  been  undermined 
in  Europe.  Receiving  a  university  education,  he  entered 
the  civil  service  of  Prussia  only  shortly  to  turn  from 
its  monotonous  routine  with  invincible  disgust.  He  then 
settled  upon  his  father's  estate  as  a  country  squire.  For 
years  he  gave  himself  up  to  the  problem  of  retrieving 
the  family  fortune,  and  with  ultimate  success.  In  1847  he 
emerged  from  his  country  life  and  began  his  political  career 
as  a  member  of  the  United  Diet.  He  now  had  an  opportu- 
nity to  expound  his  political  views,  which  he  did  with 
emphasis.  No  compromise  with  the  Revolution  was  his 
watchword.  More  royalist  than  the  King  he  resented 
the  King's  act  of  granting  a  Constitution  to  Prussia  but, 
once  granted,  he  would  abide  by  it.  But  he  had  no  notion 
that  the  Constitution  should  transform  Prussia  into  a  state 
like  England,  the  model  which  Liberals  were  constantly  urging 
other  people  to  follow.  "  The  references  to  England  are 
our  misfortune,"  he  said.  If  Prussians  were  only  English- 
men, and  possessed  all  the  institutions  and  qualities  of  Eng-  Bismarck's 
lishmen,  then  "  you  might  govern  us  in  the  English  fashion."  political 
Bismarck's  political  ideas  centered  in  his   ardent  belief  in  ^P^"^""^* 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


the  Prussian  monarchy.  It  had  been  the  Prussian  kings, 
not  the  Prussian  people,  who  had  made  Prussia  great.  This, 
the  great  historic  fact,  must  be  preserved.  What  Prussian 
kings  had  done,  they  still  would  do.  A  reduction  of  royal 
power  would  only  be  damaging  to  the  state.  "  The  Prussian 
Crown  must  not  allow  itself,"  he  said,  "  to  be  thrust  into 
the  powerless  position  of  the  English  Crown,  which  seems 
more  like  a  smartly  decorative  cupola  on  the  state  edifice, 
than  its  central  pillar  of  support,  as  I  consider  ours." 
When  the  democrats  declared  that  England  had  been  made 
great  by  democracy  he  flatly  contradicted  them.  England 
had  grown  great  under  an  aristocratic  constitution.  "  It 
remains  to  be  seen  whether  this  reforaied  constitution  (1832) 
will  maintain  itself  for  centuries  as  did  the  earlier  rule  of 
the  English  aristocracy."  He  defended  vehemently  the 
Prussian  nobility,  a  class  at  that  time  bitterly  attacked. 
By  them,  and  by  their  blood,  the  Pnissian  state  had  been 
built  up.  Bismarck  was  the  uncompromising  foe  of  the 
attempts  made  in  1848  to  achieve  German  unity,  because 
he  believed  those  attempts  involved  a  diminution  in  the 
importance  of  Prussia,  and  he  was  above  all  a  Prussian. 
"  The  Frankfort  crown  may  be  very  brilliant,"  he  said, 
"  but  the  gold  which  would  give  truth  to  its  brilliancy  can 
only  be  gained  by  melting  down  the  Pinissian  crown,"  some- 
thing he  could  not  contemplate  without  horror.  "  The 
scheme  for  a  union  annihilates  the  integrity  of  the  Prussian 
kingdom  .  .  .  Prussians  we  are  and  Prussians  we  will 
remain."  His  attitude  toward  the  assembly,  of  which  he 
was  a  member,  is  shown  by  the  words,  "  I  know  that  what 
I  have  said  to  you  will  have  no  influence  on  your  votes, 
mentary  in-  but  I  am  equally  convinced  that  your  votes  will  be  as 
stitutions.  completely  without  influence  on  the  course  of  events."  No 
European  state  had  suff'ered  a  more  complete  humilia- 
tion than  Prussia  at  Olmlitz,  yet  Bismarck  vigorously  de- 
fended the  action  of  the  Government.  "  Prussia  ought  to 
unite  with  Austria  in   order  to  crush  the  common  enemy, 


His 

attitude 
toward 
parlia- 


BISMARCK'S  DISLIKE  OF  DEMOCRACY      253 

the  Revolution."  "  I  regard  Austria  as  the  representative 
and  inheritor  of  an  ancient  German  power  which  has  often 
gloriously  wielded  the  German  sword."  The  reason  for  this 
defense  of  Olmiitz  is  highly  significant.  "  The  only  sound 
principle  of  action  for  a  great  state  is  political  egoism,  and 
not  romanticism,  and  it  is  unworthy  of  such  a  state  to  strive 
for  anything  which  does  not  directly  concern  it."  '  A  war 
with  Austria  in  1850  would  have  meant  the  ruin  of  Prussia. 
Therefore  egoism,  the  sole  legitimate  motive  force  in  politics, 
justified  the  convention  of  Olmiitz.  "According  to  my  con- 
viction," he  said  in  a  speech  which  he  incorporated  in  part 
more  than  forty  years  later  in  his  Reminiscences,  "  Prussian 
honor  does  not  consist  in  Prussia's  playing  the  Don  Quixote 
all  over  Germany  for  the  benefit  of  mortified  parliament 
celebrities  who  consider  their  local  constitution  in  danger. 
I  look  for  Prussian  honor  in  Prussia's  abstinence  before  His 
all  things  from  every  shameful  union  with  democracy ;  in  l^^^t^cd  of 
Prussia's  refusal  to  allow,  in  the  present  and  all  other 
questions,  anything  to  happen  in  Germany  without  her 
consent;  and  in  the  joint  execution  by  the  two  protecting 
powers  of  Germany,  with  equal  authority,  of  whatsoever 
they,  Prussia  and  Austria,  after  joint  independent  delibera- 
tion, consider  reasonable  and  politically  justifiable." 

By  such  utterances,  poorly  delivered,  for  he  was  no 
orator,  Bismarck  made  himself  immensely  disliked  by 
all  Liberals.  On  the  other  hand,  such  downright  and  un- 
compromising flouting  of  all  the  popular  phrases  of  the 
day,  such  unqualified  and  defiant  adherence  to  monarchy 
and  aristocracy  commended  him  to  the  King,  who  appointed 
liim,  in  1851,  Prussian  delegate  to  the  Diet  at  Frankfort. 
Bismarck's  career  now  broadened,  and  during  the  next  eight 
years   he   studied   and   practised  the   art   of   diplomacy,   in 

*  Bismarck's  political  principles  may  be  best  studied  in  the  speeches 
which  he  delivered  during  the  years  1847-1851,  and  which  may  be  found 
in  Kohl,  Die  politischen  Reden  des  Fiirsten  Bismarck,  Vol.  I.  Par- 
ticularly interesting  are  the  speeches  of  September  24,  1849,  and  Decem- 
ber 3,  1850. 


254  BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 

which  he  was   later   to   win   many   sweeping  victories.      He 
made  the  acquaintance  of  all  the  important  statesmen  and 
politicians   of  Germany   and  studied  their   characters    and 
ambitions. 
Bismarck  He  had  not  been  long  in  Frankfort  before  his  views  in 

in  the  Diet,  regard  to  Austria  changed.  He  came  to  regard  her  as  the 
constant  and  determined  enemy  of  Prussia,  and  to  believe 
that  her  policy  was  to  reduce  Prussia  to  the  position  of  a 
mere  satellite,  and  Bismarck  had  no  notion  that  a  nation 
of  17,000,000  should  occupy  that  position.  At  once  this 
jingo  Prussian  bent  all  his  energies  to  convince  his  superiors 
in  Berlin  of  this  fact.  He  soon  saw  that,  though  bound 
together  in  the  same  federation,  the  harmony  of  the  two 
great  German  powers  had  been  destroyed  by  the  events  of 
1848.  As  early  as  1853  he  said  in  a  report  to  Berlin 
that  there  was  not  room  in  Germany  for  the  two  powers — 
that  one  or  the  other  must  bend.  Three  years  later  he 
expressed  his  opinion  even  more  clearly,  "  I  only  desire  to 
express  my  conviction  that  ere  long  we  shall  have  to  fight 
Austria  for  our  very  existence;  it  is  not  in  our  power  to 
avert  that  eventuality,  for  the  course  of  events  in  Germany 
can  lead  to  no  other  result."  ^  In  1859,  as  he  was  leaving 
the  Diet  for  the  mission  to  St.  Petersburg,  he  summed  up 
the  situation,  "  I  see  in  our  federal  alliance  that  Prussia 
has  an  infirmity  which  sooner  or  later  we  shall  have  to 
heal  ferro  et  igni,  unless  we  begin  in  good  time  to  seek  a 
remedy  for  it."  "  Bismarck,"  wrote  the  Austrian  delegate  at 
the  Diet,  "  believes  that  Prussia  forms  the  center  of  the 
world."  He  did  so  regard  it,  and  his  activity  largely  made  it 
so  for  others. 

Such  was  the  man,  who  in  1862  at  the  age  of  forty-seven, 
accepted  the  position  of  President  of  the  Prussian  Ministry 
at  a  time  when  King  and  Parliament  confronted  each  other 
in  angry  deadlock,  and  when  no  other  politician  would  accept 
the  leadership.  For  four  years,  from  1862  to  1866,  the 
*  Quoted  by  Murdock,  The  Reconstruction  of  Europe,  190. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFLICT  S55 

conflict    continued.      The    Constitution   was    not    abolished,  The 

Parliament  was   called   repeatedly,   the  Lower  House  voted  ^^^^°  J^ 

^  •        1  •     1      conflict, 

year  after  year  against  the  budget,  supported  in  this  by 

the  voters,  the  Upper  House  voted  for  it,  and  the  King  acted 
as  if  this  made  it  legal.  The  period  was  one  of  virtual 
dictatorship  and  real  suspension  of  parliamentary  life.  The 
King  continued  to  collect  the  taxes,  the  army  was  thoroughly 
reorganized  and  absolutely  controlled  by  the  authorities,  and 
the  Lower  House  had  no  mode  of  opposition  save  the  verbal 
one,  which  was  entirely  ineffective. 

Thus  the  increase  in  the  army  was  secured.     But  an  army  Army- 
is  a  mere  means  to  an  end.     The  particular  end  that  Bis-  ^^eform 

•  /•  /-I  •        1       carried 

marck  had  in  view  was  the  creation  of  German  unity   by  through. 

means  of  Prussia  and  for  the  advantage  of  Prussia.  There 
must  be  no  absorption  of  Prussia  in  Germany,  as  there  had 
been  of  Piedmont  in  Italy,  Piedmont  as  a  separate  state 
entirely  disappearing.  And  in  Bismarck's  opinion  this  unity 
could  only  be  achieved  by  war. 

He  boldly  denied  in  Parliament  the  favorite  theory  of  the 
Liberals,  that  Prussia  was  to  be  made  great  by  a  liberal,  free, 
parliamentary  government,  by  setting  an  example  of  pro- 
gressiveness,  as  Piedmont  had  done,  which  would  rally  Ger- 
mans in  other  states  about  her,  rather  than  about  their  own 
governments.  In  what  was  destined  to  be  the  most  famous 
speech  of  his  life  he  declared  in  1863  that  what  Germans 
cared  about  was  not  the  liberalism  of  Prussia  but  her  power. 
Prussia  must  concentrate  her  forces  and  hold  herself  ready 
for  the  favorable  moment.  The  boundaries  of  the  kingdom, 
as  determined  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  were  not  favorable 
to  a  sound  political  life.  "  Not  by  speeches  and  majority 
votes  are  the  great  questions  of  the  day  decided — that  was 
the  great  blunder  of  1848  and  1849 — ^but  by  blood  and 
iron." 

This  "  blood  and  iron  "  policy  was  bitterly  denounced  by  "  Blood 

Liberals,  but  Bismarck  ignored  their  criticisms  and  shortly  *"*^  ^^^^ 

Dolicv 
found  a  chance  to  begin   its   application.     Displaying  re- 


256 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Prussia's 

three 

wars. 


The 

Schleswig- 

Holstein 

question. 


markable  diplomatic  astuteness  and  subtlety,  unfolding  sur- 
prising resourcefulness  in  using  the  exceedingly  complicated 
international  relations  of  his  day  in  such  a  way  as  to 
further  his  Prussian  and  German  plans,  he  proceeded  to 
reshape  Europe  in  most  important  particulars.  He  was 
favored  in  this  by  the  jealousies  of  the  powers  and  the 
general  incompetence  of  their  ministers.  It  was  fortunate 
for  Prussia  that  at  a  time  when  it  was  directed  by  one 
of  the  geniuses  of  the  century,  other  countries  were  directed 
by  mediocrities.  His  own  ability,  great  as  it  was,  would 
not  alone  have  sufficed  to  accomplish  the  work  of  the  next 
few  years. 

The  German  Empire  is  the  result  of  the  policy  of  blood 
and  iron  as  carried  out  by  Prussia  in  three  wars  which  were 
crowded  into  the  brief  period  of  six  years,  the  war  with 
Denmark  in  1864,  with  Austria  in  1866,  and  with  France 
in  1870,  the  last  two  of  which  were  largely  the  result  of  his 
will  and  his  diplomatic  ingenuity  and  unscrupulousness,  and 
the  first  of  which  he  exploited  consummately  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  Prussia. 

The  first  of  these  grew  out  of  one  of  the  most  complicated 
questions  that  have  ever  perplexed  diplomatists  and  statesmen, 
the  future  of  Schleswig  and  Holstein.  These  were  two  duchies 
in  the  Danish  peninsula,  which  is  itself  simply  an  extension 
of  the  great  plain  of  northern  Germany^.  Holstein  was  in- 
habited by  a  population  of  about  600,000,  entirely  German; 
Schleswig  by  a  population  of  from  250,000  to  300,000  Ger- 
mans and  150,000  Danes.  These  two  duchies  had  for  cen- 
turies been  united  with  Denmark,  but  they  did  not  form 
an  integral  part  of  the  Danish  kingdom.  Their  relation 
to  Denmark  was  personal,  arising  from  the  fact  that  a  Duke 
of  Schleswig  and  Holstein  had  become  King  of  Denmark, 
just  as  an  Elector  of  Hanover  had  become  a  King  of  Eng- 
land. The  King  of  Denmark  was  in  the  duchies  simply 
duke.  The  Danes  naturally  wished  to  make  this  union  a 
real  one,  to  incorporate  entirely  the  duchies  with  the  king- 


THE  SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN  QUESTION     257 

dom.  But  there  were  plain  obstacles  in  the  way.  Holstein 
(not  Schleswig)  was  a  part  of  the  Geniian  Confederation; 
the  King  of  Denmark  as  Duke  of  Holstein  was  represented 
in  the  Diet  of  Frankfort,  as  were  the  King  of  Prussia  and 
the  Emperor  of  Austria.  Now  the  Germans  in  Schleswig 
wished  to  have  that  duchy  also  a  part  of  the  German  Con- 
federation, and  were  warmly  supported  in  this  desire  by 
the  public  opinion  of  Germans  everywhere.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Danes  of  Schleswig  wished  to  have  the  duchy 
annexed  to  Denmark,  and  were  naturally  supported  in  this 
by  the  Danes  of  that  kingdom. 

The  question  had  long  been  before  Europe,  but  in  1863  -^^ction  of 

DciiiTinrlc 

it  became  acute,  when  on  November  13,  1863,  the  Danish  concemine 
Parliament  adopted  a  new  Constitution,  which  incorporated  Schleswig. 
Schleswig  with  Denmark.  Two  days  later  the  king, 
Frederick  VII,  died,  but  his  successor.  Christian  IX,  signed 
the  Constitution.  What  would  Germany  do?  Would  it 
allow  Germans  to  be  annexed  to  a  foreign  country  out- 
right? The  Diet  at  once  protested,  and  ordered  an  army 
sent  into  the  duchies  to  prevent  this  consummation,  and  in 
doing  this  it  had  the  enthusiastic  support  of  public  opinion 
throughout  Germany.  Bismarck,  however,  declined  to  join 
in  this  policy.  He  saw  in  the  situation  a  chance  for  the 
eventual  aggrandizement  of  Prussia,  and  for  a  possible 
future  quarrel  with  Austria.  He,  therefore,  wished  Prussia 
to  follow  an  independent  line.  He  urged  Austria  to  join  with 
Prussia  in  upholding  the  London  Protocol  of  1852,  which 
both  powers  had  signed,  as  had  the  other  powers  of  Europe, 
a  treaty  which  regulated  the  succession  to  the  duchies,  under 
certain  conditions,  the  main  condition  being  that  Christian 
might  be  King  of  Denmark  and  Duke  of  Schleswig,  but  that 
the  duchy  should  preserve  its  separateness  from  Denmark. 
Bismarck's  position  was  that  Austria  and  Prussia  had  a  Bismarck's 
right  to  demand  the  observance  of  the  treaty  which  they  had 
signed,  and  that  they  would  support  Christian  if  he  would  question, 
live  up   to  the   conditions.       He   induced  Austria   to   join 


258 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Prussia 

and 

Austria 

at  war 

with 

Denmark. 


him  in  supporting  this  Treaty  of  London,  claiming  that  they 
were  simply  upholding  the  sacredness  of  international  agree- 
ments. The  two  powers  proclaimed  their  intention  to  adhere 
to  that  treaty,  but  demanded  that  the  Danes  withdraw  the 
recent  Constitution,  which  they  declared  was  in  defiance  of 
it.  The  duplicity  of  Bismarck's  policy  lay  in  the  fact 
that  he  had  assured  himself  that  the  Danes  would  not  make 
this  concession,  which,  moreover,  he  did  not  wish  them  to 
make,  as  his  whole  purpose  was  to  pick  a  quarrel  from 
which  Prussia  might  profit.  To  make  assurance  doubly 
sure,  the  ultimatum  presented  to  Demnark  demanded  the 
withdrawal  within  forty-eight  hours  of  the  Constitution  in- 
corporating Sclileswig.  This,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  was 
impossible,  even  if  the  Danes  had  unanimously  desired  it. 
The  King  could  not  do  this  of  his  own  prerogative:  he 
must  have  the  assent  of  his  Parliament.  His  Parliament 
had  been  dissolved  and  a  new  one  had  not  been  elected. 
Naturally,  this  could  not  be  done  in  two  days.  At  the 
expiration  of  that  time  Prussia  and  Austria  declared  war 
against  Denmark  in  the  name  of  the  Treaty  of  London  of 
1852.  But  Bismarck  knew  that  a  war  between  two  coun- 
tries abrogates  existing  treaties  between  them,  a  fact  which 
he  was  prepared  to  utilize  to  Prussia's  advantage  in  time. 
In  the  name  of  the  Treaty  of  1852  he  made  war  against 
Denmark  for  the  real  purpose  of  breaking  that  very  treaty. 
A  war  between  one  small  state  and  two  large  ones  could 
not  be  doubtful.  Sixty  thousand  Prussians  and  Austrians 
invaded  Denmark  in  February  1864,  and,  though  their  cam- 
paign was  not  brilliant,  they  easily  won.  The  only  danger 
was  in  a  European  intervention.  A  conference  was  held  in 
London  for  the  purpose  of  arranging  a  settlement  by  di- 
plomacy. But  nothing  was  accomplished.  Russia  was  grate- 
ful for  Prussian  aid  in  the  recent  Polish  insurrection ;  France 
and  England  were  full  of  reproaches  for  each  other.  In  such 
troubled  waters  Bismarck  could  fish  successfully.  He  was 
able  to   block  the  proposed  intervention,       The   war  was 


THE  FUTURE  OF  THE  DUCHIES  259 

successful  for  Prussia  and  Austria,  and  Denmark  on  Octo- 
ber 30,   1864,   signed   the   Treaty   of   Vienna,   whereby   she  Treaty  of 

renounced   all  rights  to   Schleswig,  Holstein,   and  the  little  Vienna, 

.  .  Oct.   1864, 

duchy    of   Lauenburg,    contiguous    to    the    latter,    in    favor 

of  Austria  and  Prussia,  and  agreed  to  recognize  any  dis- 
position they  should  make  concerning  them.  Bismarck  later 
regarded  his  handling  of  the  Schleswig-Holstein  matter  as 
the  diplomatic  masterpiece  of  his  career. 

The  question  now  was  what  sliould  be  the  future  of  the  ^^® 

.  future 

duchies.?       Their    inhabitants    wished    to    form    a    separate    .  ,, 

state  under  the  Duke  of  Augustenburg  and  be  admitted  as  duchies, 
such  to  the  German  Confederation.  The  people  of  Ger- 
many were  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  this  arrangement, 
and  Austria  favored  it.  But  Bismarck's  ideas  were  very 
different.  He  did  not  care  for  another  German  state. 
Tliere  were  too  many  already,  and  this  one  would  only  be 
another  enemy  of  Prussia  and  ally  of  Austria.  Moreover, 
Bismarck  wished  to  annex  the  duchies  wholly  or  in  part  to 
Prussia.  He  desired  aggrandizement  in  general,  but  this 
particular  addition  would  be  especially  advantageous,  as  it 
would  lengthen  the  coast  line  of  Prussia,  would  bring  with 
it  several  good  harbors,  notably  Kiel,  and  would  enable 
Prussia  to  expand  commercially.  Thus  the  two  powers 
were  at  variance  over  the  disposition  of  their  spoils.  Bis- 
marck, recognizing  the  impossibility  of  gaining  his  end 
directly,  agreed  to  recognize  the  rights  of  Augustenburg 
on  certain  conditions,  which  he  knew  Augustenburg  would 
never  accept.      Prussia  and  Austria  thus  differed  from  the  Friction 

outset  as  to  the  future  of  Schleswie;  and  Holstein.     Sources  ''^*""'^®^ 
.  .  Prussia 

of  friction  were  so  numerous,  tension  became  so  great,  that  ^nd 

war  between  them  seemed  imminent  in  1865.     But  Austria  Austria. 

did  not   feel  in   condition   for  war,   and,   though   Bismarck 

favored    it,    the    King    of    Prussia    opposed    it.       He    was 

not  yet  prepared  for  a  fratricidal  contest  which  did  violence 

to    his    patriotic    and    national     feelings.        Consequently, 

the  Convention   of  Gastein  was   made  by  the  two  parties 


260 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Prussia 
acquires 
Lauenburg 
by  pur- 
chase. 


August  14<,  1865.  Joint  rule  was  given  up  in  practice, 
though  not  in  principle.  The  duchies  belonged  to  the  two 
powers,  but  henceforth  Austria  alone  should  administer  Hol- 
stein  and  Prussia  Schleswig.  Lauenburg  was  sold  outright 
to  Prussia  by  Austria  for  two  and  a  half  million  thalers. 
This  was  the  first  of  Prussian  annexations.  The  treaty  also 
signified  a  virtual  abandonment  of  the  Duke  of  Augusten- 
burg. 

Bismarck  approved  the  Treaty  of  Gastein,  because,  in  his 
opinion,  it  ended  nothing.  He  called  it  a  mere  "  stopping 
of  cracks."  He  regarded  it  simply  as  a  new  trick  in  the 
game  with  Austria.  That  the  Convention  was  universally 
denounced  abroad  and  in  Germany  as  merely  cold-blooded 
bargaining  was  a  matter  of  indifi^erence  to  him.  Out  of  the 
situation  which  it  created  he  hoped  to  bring  about  the  war 
with  Austria,  which  he  had  desired  for  the  past  ten  years  as 
being  the  only  means  whereby  German  unity  could  be 
achieved  by  Prussia  and  for  its  advantage.  In  this  he 
was  successful  within  a  year.  There  was  not  room  in 
Germany,  he  thought,  for  both  powers,  "  one  or  the  other 
must  bend."  He  now  directed  his  attention  to  the  creation 
of  an  international  situation  which  would  leave  Austria  iso- 
lated in  the  event  of  a  conflict.  He  turned  to  diplomacy, 
and  the  result  was  an  interview  with  Napoleon  HI,  and  an 
alliance  with  Italy.  The  attitude  of  France  he  regarded 
as  most  important.  Consequently,  he  took  occasion  to 
seek  a  conference  with  Napoleon  HI  at  Biarritz.  The  meet- 
meeting  at  ij^g  Q^^  Biarritz  (Oct.  1865)  has  been  considered,  though  in- 
correctly, to  have  had  somewhat  the  same  importance  in  Ger- 
man history  that  that  of  Plombieres  has  in  Italian.  What 
passed  we  know  only  imperfectly.  No  formal,  written  en- 
gagements were  made.  Bismarck  returned  with  the  conviction 
that  Napoleon  would  remain  neutral  in  case  of  a  war  between 
Prussia  and  Austria,  that  the  annexation  of  Schleswig  and 
Holstein  would  call  forth  no  opposition  from  him,  that  he 
would  even  view  it  with  favor  as  being  in  harmony  with 


The 


PREPARATIONS  FOR  WAR  WITH  AUSTRIA     261 

his  favorite  doctrine  of  nationalities.  Bismarck  told  the 
Emperor  that  the  constitution  of  the  German  Confedera- 
tion ought  to  be  completely  reformed.  Napoleon  seems  to 
have  entered  no  protest.  Bismarck,  holding  that  states- 
manship is  simply  enlightened  egoism,  believed  that  in  re- 
turn for  pennission  to  make  these  changes  France  must 
be  paid.  Consequently,  he  dangled  before  the  Emperor 
chances  of  enlarging  the  boundaries  of  France,  but  all 
this  was  very  vague,  though  quite  friendly,  and  resulted 
in  no  precise  agreements. 

Bismarck  sought  a  treaty  of  alliance  with  Italy  for  the  Treaty 
coming  encounter.  Italy  coveted  Venetia,  and  in  April 
1866,  after  much  diplomatic  manoeuvering,  arising  from  the 
fact  that  neither  power  had  confidence  in  the  honesty  of 
the  other,  a  treaty  was  made  and  signed  on  April  8,  1866. 
It  was  to  the  effect  that  if  Prussia  should  within  three 
months  go  to  war  with  Austria  for  the  sake  of  reforms 
in  the  German  Confederation,  Italy  should  also  declare 
war  against  Austria;  that  neither  would  make  a  separate 
peace ;  that  if  the  allies  were  successful,  Italy  should  receive 
Venetia  from  Austria  and  Prussia  an  equivalent  amount  of 
Austrian  territory. 

From  the  moment  this  treaty  was  signed  Bismarck  de- 
voted all  his  efforts  to  bringing  about  the  war  with  Austria 
within  the  three  months.  It  was  not  difficult  to  find  pre- 
texts. The  Treaty  of  Gastein  proved  a  most  convenient 
aid.  Prussia  protested  vigorously  against  Austria's  method 
of  administering  Holstein.  Austria  resented  the  criticism 
as  an  impertinent  interference  in  her  own  affairs.  Rela- 
tions between  the  two  powers  thus  became  strained  to  the 
breaking  point,  and  both  began  to  arm.  Still  some  weeks 
went  by  before  hostilities  commenced. 

Bismarck's   ultimate  purpose  in   all  his   actions   was   the  Bismarck 

acquisition  of  the  leadership  in  Germany  for  Prussia  away  P^^P^^^^ 
J.  .  .  .   .  "^  for  a  war 

from  Austria.      He  was  preparmg  a  German  civil  war  for  -^mi 

that  end;  but  he  wished  to  give  it  a  broader  basis  than  a  Austria. 


262 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Bismarck 
proposes  a 
reform  of 
the  Con- 
federation. 


mere  sordid  quarrel  about  the  northern  duchies,  in  which 
uo  idea  was  apparent  save  self-aggrandizement.  He  now 
sought  to  give  a  new  turn  and  a  more  important  character 
to  this  rivalry  of  Austria  and  Prussia.  He  preferred  to 
appear  to  be  fighting  for  the  reform  of  the  German  Con- 
federation rather  than  for  the  duchies.  On  April  9th,  the 
very  day  after  the  signature  of  the  treaty  with  Italy,  and 
in  consonance  with  one  of  its  provisions,  that  very  one, 
indeed,  on  which  the  whole  treaty  rested,  he  caused  the 
Prussian  plan  for  the  reform  of  the  Confederation  to  be  in- 
troduced into  the  Diet  at  Frankfort.  The  plan  was  entirely 
unexpected.  It  was  vague  in  all  that  concerned  the  rela- 
tions of  the  princes  to  each  other,  but  definite  in  that  it 
proposed  that  in  addition  to  the  Diet  there  should  be  chosen 
by  universal  suffrage  a  popular  chamber  to  share  in  the 
management  of  common  affairs.  The  amazement  of  Ger- 
man Liberals  was  unbounded.  Here  was  the  man  who  had 
spent  his  life  deriding  and  defying  parliaments  and  ridiculing 
democracy  now  adopting  its  extreme  demand — universal  suf- 
frage. The  Liberals  thought  it  a  mere  trick  and  did  not  take 
the  proposal  seriously.  This  was  a  turning  point  in  Bis- 
marck's career.  He  was  now  presenting  a  scheme  for  the  re- 
organization of  Germany,  and  he  saw  that  if  Prussia  was 
to  gain  the  leadership  she  must  make  some  sacrifices  to 
the  feelings  of  the  other  states.  They  would  not  willingly  ac- 
cept the  leadership  of  an  autocratic,  parliament-defying 
Prussia.  By  conceding  universal  suffrage,  liberal  opinion, 
hitherto  hostile  to  Prussia,  might  be  won.  The  full  effect  of 
this  proposal  was  not  seen  until  later.  Prussia's  power  was 
not  immediately  increased,  owing  to  the  distrust  which  Bis- 
marck's career  inspired  in  the  minds  of  Liberals.  It  seems 
likely  that  Bismarck  did  not  now  fear  universal  suffrage,  as 
he  had  seen  how  favorably  it  had  worked  in  France  for  a 
despotic  Emperor. 

Even    after   this    there   was    delay.       Bismarck   was    still 
waiting  for  the  provocation  to   come  from  Austria.       He 


THE  AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN  WAR  263 

wished  to  throw  upon  her  the  odium  of  beginning  the  civil 

war  which  he  was  doing  everything  in  his  power  to  render 

inevitable.      At  last  the  moment  came.      On  June  1,  1866, 

Austria  brought  the  Schleswig-Holstein  question  before  the 

Diet.      At  once  Bismarck  declared  that  this  was  a  breach 

of  the  Treaty  of  Gastein.      That  agreement  was,  therefore, 

void  and  Prussian  troops  were  sent  into  Holstein,  Austria's 

jurisdiction.       Austria    on    June    11th   moved    in    the    Diet 

that  the  Federal   forces   be  sent   against   Prussia.      Prussia  Prussia 

announced  to  the  other  states  that  every  vote  in  favor  of  withdraws 

this    motion   would   be    regarded    as    a    declaration    of   war.  ^Qj^fg^gj-a- 

On  June  14th  the  vote  was  taken  and  the  motion  carried,  tion. 

Pronouncing    this    levying    of    war    by    the    Confederation 

against   one   of    its    members    illegal,    Prussia    declared   the 

Confederation  dissolved,  again  brought  forward  her  refonn 

plans,  and  prepared  for  immediate  action. 

Thus  the  German  civil  war  began.      Bismarck  had  brought  The 

about  his  dream  of  a  conflict  between  peoples  of  the  same  ^ 

^      '■  Prussian 

race  to  determine  the  question  of  control.  It  proved  to  ^a,r. 
be  one  of  the  shortest  wars  in  history,  one  of  the  most  de- 
cisive, and  one  whose  consequences  were  most  momentous. 
It  is  called  the  Seven  Weeks'  War.  It  began  June  16, 
1866,  was  virtually  decided  on  July  3d,  was  brought  to 
a  close  before  the  end  of  that  month  by  the  preliminary 
Peace  of  Nikolsburg,  July  26th,  which  was  followed  a 
month  later  by  the  definitive  Peace  of  Prague,  August  23. 
Prussia  had  no  German  allies  of  any  importance.  Several 
of  the  North  German  states  sided  with  her,  but  these  were 
small  and  their  armies  were  unimportant.  On  the  other 
hand,  Austria  was  supported  by  the  four  kingdoms,  Ba- 
varia, Wiirtemberg,  Saxony,  and  Hanover ;  also  by  Hesse- 
Cassel,  Hesse-Darmstadt,  Nassau,  and  Baden.  But  Prussia 
had  one  important  ally,  Italy,  without  whose  aid  she  might 
not  have  won  the  victory.  The  Prussian  army,  however, 
was  better  prepared.  For  years  the  rulers  of  Prussia  had 
been  preparing  for  war,  perfecting  the  army  down  to  the 


264. 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


von    Moltke, 
1800-1891. 


minutest  detail,  and  with  scientific  thoroughness,  and  when 
the  war  began  it  was  absolutely  ready.  Moreover,  it  was 
directed  by  the  greatest  military  genius  Europe  has  seen 
Hellmuth  since  Napoleon,  General  von  Moltke.  Moltke  had  studied 
profoundly  Napoleon's  methods.  A  thorough  master  of  the 
principles  of  war,  he  was  particularly  remarkable  as  an 
organizer.  He  had  carefully  worked  out  the  relation  to 
war  of  the  modern  means  of  rapid  communication,  the  rail- 
way and  the  telegraph.  Devoting  endless  time  and  thought 
to  elaborate,  minute  preparation,  so  that  it  happened  that 
no  army  ever  in  history  had  been  able  to  get  under  way 
with  the  quickness  of  the  one  he  commanded,  he  also  dis- 
played audacity  in  action.  He  had,  moreover,  under  him 
men  similarly  trained  in  theory,  in  the  actual  handling 
of  troops,  and  with  similar  qualities  of  intelligence,  judg- 
ment, and  daring. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Austrian  army  had  as  commander 
Benedek,  who  said  of  himself  that  he  could  command  a 
division,  but  felt  unable  to  command  an  army,  forced,  how- 
ever, by  loyalty  to  the  Emperor  to  accept  a  command  which 
he  had  at  first  refused.  His  army  also  had  no  such  per- 
fection of  organization  as  had  that  of  Prussia.  Moreover, 
Austria  had  two  enemies  to  fight — one  in  front,  Prussia; 
one  in  the  rear,  Italy,  a  condition  always  full  of 
danger. 

Prussia  had  many  enemies.  Being  absolutely  prepared, 
while  her  enemies  were  not,  she  could  assume  the  offensive, 
and  this  was  the  cause  of  her  first  victories.  War  began 
June  16th.  Within  three  days  Prussian  troops  had  occupied 
Hanover,  Dresden,  and  Cassel,  the  capitals  of  her  three 
North  German  enemies.  The  Hanoverian  army  defeated 
the  Prussian  at  Langensalza  June  27th,  but  was  compelled 
to  capitulate  two  days  later,  the  Prussians  having  received 
large  reinforcements.  The  King  of  Hanover  and  the  Elector 
of  Hesse  were  taken  prisoners  of  war.  All  North  Ger- 
many was  now  controlled  by  Prussia,  and  within  two  weeks 


Prussia 
conquers 
North 
Germany. 


THE  BATTLE  OF  KONIGGRATZ  265 

of  the  opening  of  the  war  she  was  ready  to  attempt  the 
great  plan  of  Moltke,  an  invasion  of  Bohemia.  The  rapid- 
ity of  the  campaign  struck  Europe  with  amazement.  Moltke 
sent   three    armies    by    different    routes    into    Bohemia,   and  The 

on  July  3,  1866,  one  of  the  great  battles  of  history,  that     

of  Koniggratz,  or  Sadowa,  was  fought.  Each  army  num-  or  Sadowa. 
bered  over  200,000,  the  Prussians  outnumbering  the  Aus- 
trians,  though  not  at  the  beginning.  Since  the  battle  of 
Leipsic  in  1813,  so  many  troops  had  not  been  engaged 
in  a  single  conflict.  King  William,  Bismarck,  Roon,  and 
Moltke  took  up  their  position  on  a  hill,  whence  they  could 
view  the  scene.  The  battle  was  long  and  doubtful.  Be- 
ginning early  in  the  morning,  it  continued  for  hours,  fought 
with  terrific  fury,  the  Prussians  making  no  advance  against 
the  Austrian  artillery.  Up  to  two  o'clock  it  seemed  an 
Austrian  victory,  but  with  the  arrival  of  the  Prussian  Crown 
Prince  with  his  army  the  issue  was  turned,  and  at  half-past 
three  the  Austrians  were  beaten  and  their  retreat  began. 
They  had  lost  over  forty  thousand  men,  while  the  Prussian 
loss  was  about  ten  thousand.  The  Prussian  army  during  the 
next  three  weeks  advanced  to  within  sight  of  the  spires  of 
Vienna. 

On  June  24th  the  Austrians  had  been  victorious  over 
the  Italians  at  Custozza.  Yet  the  Italians  had  helped 
Prussia  in  detaining  80,000  Austrian  troops,  which,  had  they 
been  at  Koniggratz,  would  probably  have  turned  the  day. 
The  Italian  fleet  was  also  defeated  by  the  Austrian  at  Lissa, 
July  20th. 

Prussia  still  had  enemies,  the  Confederate  armies,  and 
the  troops  of  the  South  German  states,  notably  Bavaria. 
But  she  made  equally  short  work  of  these  obstacles.  The 
Bavarian  army  was  defeated  at  Kissingen  July  10th.  Finally 
Frankfort,  hitherto  the  seat  of  the  German  Confederation, 
was  entered  July  16th.  The  southern  states  sued  for 
peace. 

The  causes  of  the  overthrow  of  Austria  were  numerous. 


266 


BISMARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


Causes  of 

Austria's 

defeat. 


Results  of 
the  Austro- 
Prussian 
war. 


Some  have  already  been  indicated.  The  armies  which  Moltke 
commanded  were  probably  the  best  that  had  ever  appeared 
upon  the  field  of  battle,  and  they  were  directed  by  a  single 
master-mind  which  gave  coherence  and  harmony  to  their 
movements.  The  Austrian  army,  on  the  otlier  hand,  was, 
in  point  of  military  instruction,  inferior.  Moreover,  it 
was  not  pervaded  by  the  same  single,  national  enthusiasm. 
Austria  was  not  a  single  people,  but  a  collection  of  peoples, 
who  were  separated  by  jealousies  and  animosities,  and  the 
army  exemplified  these  divisions.  The  Hungarians  gave  no 
enthusiastic  support,  for,  since  1849,  they  had  been  alienated 
from  the  Empire  which  had  taken  away  their  Constitution. 
The  Slavs  were  lukewarm,  hating  the  Government  of  Vienna, 
which  was  largely  German.  The  allies  of  Austria  in  Ger- 
many were  poorly  equipped,  poorly  commanded,  and  unable 
to  co-operate  heartily.  Again,  while  the  Austrian  artillery 
and  cavalry  were  superior  to  the  Prussian,  the  infantry 
was  equipped  with  a  weapon  far  inferior.  The  "  needle  gun 
is  king,"  said  the  London  Times  after  the  news  of  Konig- 
gratz.  This  gun  was  superior  to  the  Austrian  in  that,  being 
more  easily  loaded,  it  could  be  discharged  four  or  five  times 
a  minute,  while  the  Austrian  gun  could  be  discharged  only 
once.  In  almost  all  the  encounters  of  the  war  the  losses  were 
proportionate  to  the  rapidity  of  fire.  Again,  the  tactics  of 
the  Austrians  increased  their  losses  immensely.  They  fought 
in  serried  ranks,  while  the  Prussians,  having  learned  that  the 
progress  in  fireanus  rendered  such  methods  very  costly, 
fought  in  loose  order,  taking  advantage  of  the  inequalities 
of  surface,  and  of  the  protection  afforded  by  trees  and 
thickets. 

The  results  of  the  Seven  Weeks'  War  were  momentous. 
Fearing  the  intervention  of  Europe,  and  particularly  that 
of  France,  which  was  threatened,  and  which  might  rob  the 
victory  of  its  fruits,  Bismarck  wished  to  make  peace  at  once, 
and  consequently  offered  very  lenient  terms  to  Austria.  His 
moderation  was  bitterly  opposed  by  the  military  leaders  of 


=^nJ^ 


LtMffft/wteEast  I* 


^ 


/V^ornholni 


'T 


T 


Xnglish  MiM 


\  'iiMimffH'" 


c 


I  ^ 


■^Afeto 


ipaiaio  I 


-<^ 


'C 


Poseny  / 


'^•(M/a 


\ 


n 


d 


tWflp- 


Mhen 


siati 


ff%« 


Pi" 


Triuliinfig 


R   ^^ 


^.■i 


oHjel-^^ 


■1    ^ 


ffotin^ 


^S' 


Tahur. 


X^ 


ATrentc/tin 


)5-..,-.,|-'       L  o  A>|^  e  I*       J  '-^  lA  JR 

Li  s  't  r  ioci I  f 


Jieiisohl 


'    .VetUra 


The  Gro^^^rtiof 
PRUSSIA 

SINCE  1815 . 

[ZZ]  Prussin:/8f5 

I     n  IHISXrwIv  (irquirfifiTerrUxtry 

[ZZ_J  Aa/i/JS//ui/isii/t/}J  1801 

UZZ\ArQuifiiimsiifWilhfimrl8t}}-l8ti8i 

ZmSAcqu.isiWru  of  WiUiamE 

TerriUni/islMtandMregaiiud 

NumiersgiwOu'ymrHfaf/fimUwii; 

inhrafktts  yearflfhss 

B.-fwmBaniria 

D.-t'roniOmml  Dudirot  Hesse 

KrfwmEkii^rcUe  'of Hesse. 


PRUSSIAN  ANNEXATIONS  ^^67 

Prussia,*  but  finally  won  the  day,  and  the  Preliminaries  of 
Nikolsburg  were  agreed  to,  July  26th.  Austria  was  to  cede 
Venetia  to  Italy,  but  was  to  lose  no  other  territory.  She  was 
to  pay  a  small  indemnity  and  was  to  withdraw  permanently 
from  the  German  Confederation,  which,  indeed,  was  to  cease 
to  exist.  She  was  to  allow  Prussia  to  organize  and  lead  a 
new  confederation,  composed  of  those  states  which  were  north 
of  the  river  Main.  The  South  German  states  were  left  free 
to  act  as  they  chose.  Thus  Germany,  north  of  the  Main, 
was  to  be  united. 

Having  accomplished  this,  Prussia  proceeded  to  make  Annexations 
important  annexations  to  her  own  territory.  The  King-  russia. 
tlom  of  Hanover,  the  Duchies  of  Nassau  and  Hcsse-Cassel, 
and  the  free  city  of  Frankfort,  as  well  as  the  Duchies  of 
Schleswig  and  Holstein,  were  incorporated  in  the  Prussian 
kingdom.  Her  population  was  thereby  increased  by  over 
four  and  a  half  million  new  subjects,  and  thus  was  about 
twenty-four  million.  Her  territory  was  increased  by  thir- 
teen hundred  square  miles,  almost  a  fourth  of  her  former 
area.  Her  western  and  eastern  provinces  were  thus  finally 
united  by  the  absorption  of  those  states  that  lay  between, 
and  she  now  gained  a  cohesion  she  had  always  lacked.  She 
henceforth  controlled  the  northern  coast  of  Germany,  with 
brief  gaps,  from  Russia  to  Holland.  There  was  no  thought 
of  having  the  people  of  these  states  vote  on  the  question 
of  annexation,  as  had  been  done  in  Italy,  and  in  Savoy  and 
Nice.  They  were  annexed  forthwith  by  right  of  military 
conquest.  Reigning  houses  ceased  to  rule  on  order  from 
Berlin.  With  singular  fatuity  European  nations  allowed 
the  swift  consummation  of  these  changes,  which  altered  the 
balance  of  power  and  the  map  of  Europe — a  mistake  that 
France  in  particular  was  to  repent  most  bitterly.      "  I  do 

^  This  is  explicitly  asserted  by  Bismarck  in  one  of  the  most  dramatic 
sections  of  his  Reflections  and  Reminiscences  (II,  47-54).  On  the 
other  hand  the  correctness  of  his  assertion  has  been  subjected  to 
very  damaging  criticism  by  Professor  Max  Lenz.  See  Lenz,  Zur  Kritik 
der   Gedanken   und   Erinnerungen   des   Fiirsten   Bismarck,   58-132. 


268 


BIS]VIARCK  AND  GERMAN  UNITY 


The 
North 
German 
Confedera- 
tion, 
1867-1871. 


not  like  this  dethronement  of  dynasties,"  said  the  Tsar,  but 
he  failed  to  express  his  dislike  in  action.^ 

Bismarck,  now  wishing  for  the  support  of  the  Liberals  in 
his  future  work,  came  before  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  and 
asked  and  received  an  indemnity  for  having  governed  with- 
out a  budget.  Thus  he  recognized  the  rights  of  the  Cham- 
ber under  the  Constitution.  But  this  action  was  more  formal 
than  real.  The  Crown  had  won  these  amazing  successes 
in  the  face  of  the  bitter  opposition  of  the  Chamber,  opposi- 
tion to  the  reorganization  of  the  army,  to  the  war  with 
Denmark,  and  to  the  war  with  Austria.  The  Crown  had 
defeated  Parliament  morally,  as  well  as  practically.  The 
confidence  of  the  German  people  in  parliamentary  govern^ 
ment  was  seriously  undermined. 

The  German  Confederation,  established  in  1815,  dis- 
appeared forever  in  the  cataclysm  of  1866.  The  Diet  of 
Frankfort  was  no  more.  Austria  was  excluded  from  Ger- 
many by  the  Treaty  of  Prague.  There  was  now  formed 
a  new  confederation,  more  limited  geographically,  but  of 
far  greater  power  than  the  old — a  real  federal  state.  This 
North  German  Confederation  included  all  Germany  north 
of  the  river  Main,  twenty-two  states  in  all:  i.e.,  two  king- 
doms, Prussia  and  Saxony;  ten  duchies,  seven  principalities, 
and  the  free  cities  of  Hamburg,  Liibeck,  and  Bremen.  Not 
included  were  Bavaria,  Wiirtemberg,  Baden,  and  that  part 
of  Hesse-Darmstadt  south  of  the  boundary  river. 

The  Constitution  of  this  new  state  merits  examination, 
as,  with  certain  slight  and  formal  changes,  it  subsists  to-day 
as  the  Constitution  of  Germany.  Bismarck  was  its  author. 
After  some  amendments  were  made  in  it  with  Prussia's  con- 
sent,  it  was   accepted  by   the  Governments    of  the   several 

*  The  Russian  Government,  declaring  that,  as  the  German  Confedera- 
tion had  been  founded  in  1815  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  to  which 
all  the  powers  were  parties,  it  could  not  be  abolished  by  Prussia  alone, 
proposed  a  new  international  congress  to  settle  the  terms  of  peace. 
Against  this  proposal  Bismarck  assumed  an  attitude  so  highly  belliger- 
ent, threatening  war  d  outrance,  that  it  was  dropped. 


THE  NORTH  GERMAN  CONFEDERATION        269 

states,  and  was  then  submitted  in  1867  to  a  National  As- 
sembly chosen  by  manhood  suffrage  for  the  purpose.  Passed 
by  this  body  with  some  slight  alterations,  it  was  finally  rati- 
fied without  further  amendment  by  the  legislatures  of  the 
several  states. 

The  new  federal  organization  was  to  consist  of  a  PresI-  The 
dent,  the  King  of  Prussia,  of  a  Federal  Council  (Bundes-  ^^  ^  " 
rath),  and  a  Parliament  (Reichstag).  The  Federal  Coun- 
cil was  really  the  old  Diet  of  Frankfort,  preserved  in  the 
new  scheme.  It  was  to  be  composed  of  delegates  sent  by  the 
sovereigns  of  the  different  states,  to  be  recalled  at  their 
pleasure,  bound  by  instructions  given  them  by  their  princes. 
The  voting  power  of  the  different  states  was  fixed  arbitrarily 
and  not  according  to  population,  differing  from  the  Senate 
of  the  United  States  in  that  the  number  of  votes  allotted  the 
different  states  greatly  varied.  There  were  to  be  43  votes 
in  all.  Of  these  Prussia  was  to  have  17,  Saxony  4,  Mecklen- 
burg-Schwerin  and  Brunswick  2,  each  of  the  others  1.  In 
order  to  have  a  majority,  Prussia  would  have  to  gain  the 
support  of  five  little  principalities,  which  she  could  easily  do. 
In  regard  to  military  organization,  no  change  might  be 
made  in  the  laws  without  the  consent  of  Prussia. 

Associated  with  this  Bundesrath,  or  Council  of  Princes,  The 

•  S(6iclis1(£i&ro 

as  it  really  was,  was  the  Reichstag,  or  Parliament,  com- 
posed of  297  members,  elected  by  direct  manhood  suffrage 
and  by  secret  ballot,  for  three  years.  Of  the  two  bodies 
the  Reichstag  was  much  the  less  important,  therein  differing 
from  the  popularly  elected  chamber  in  other  countries.  The 
emphasis  in  this  new  organization  of  Germany  was  put  upon 
the  princes,  the  sovereigns,  not  upon  the  people.  The  people 
were  given  a  place  in  the  system,  but  a  subordinate  one. 
Bismarck  always  considered  the  Bundesrath  the  key  to 
the  Constitution.  Large  powers  of  legislation  were  given 
to  the  new  government.  All  laws  and  all  taxes  must  pass 
both  chambers. 

The  new  Constitution  went  into  force  July  1,  1867.    "  Let 


270 


BISiVIARCK  AND  GERIVIAN  UNITY 


Alliance 
with  South. 
German 
states. 


Consoli- 
dating   the 
new 
system. 


us  work  quickly,"  Bismarck  said  while  the  Constitution  was 
under  disscusion,  "  let  us  put  Germany  in  the  saddle ;  she 
will  soon  learn  to  ride,"  another  Bismarckian  prophecy 
destined  to  come  true.  Germany  now  entered  upon  a  period 
of  remarkable  progress,  which  has  continued  to  this  day. 
Legislative  activity  supplemented  and  clinched  the  triumphs 
of  diplomacy  and  war.  The  old  Confederation  had  failed 
in  two  particulars,  said  Bismarck  in  the  Parliament  of  1867 : 
it  had  failed  to  insure  the  national  safety,  and  it  had  failed 
to  develop  adequately  the  prosperity  of  the  nation.  These 
were  not  to  be  the  failures  of  the  new.  Its  military  strength 
was  amply  assured.  The  armies  of  the  different  states  were 
now  all  organized  on  the  Prussian  model,  with  the  President 
of  the  Confederation  as  chief.  He  now  commanded  an  army 
of  800,000  men.  Moreover,  Bismarck  was  able,  by  playing 
upon  their  fear  of  France,  to  induce  the  South  German  states 
to  enter  into  a  military  alliance,  offensive  and  defensive,  with 
the  North  German  Confederation.  This  increased  the  army 
to  over  a  million.  In  a  military  sense  Germany  was  unified. 
Laws  were  rapidly  passed  aiming  to  increase  the  material 
well-being,  to  enlist  firmly  on  the  side  of  the  new  experiment 
the  capitalist,  industrial  classes.  The  growth  of  the  modem 
industrial  system  had  been,  as  we  have  seen,  one  of  the 
forces  making  for  unity.  It  had  greatly  helped  to  create 
the  situation  in  which  Bismarck  had  been  able  to  work  so 
effectively.  The  business  world  now  demanded  that  the 
state  reward  it  by  the  removal  of  many  restrictions  which 
had  survived  the  Zollverein  and  which  hampered  economic 
activity.  Certain  laws  wliich  restricted  the  free  movement 
of  the  people  were  repealed,  passports  being  suppressed, 
the  absolute,  unqualified  right  of  every  citizen  to  reside  any- 
where in  the  Confederation  guaranteed.  This  aided  indus- 
tries by  providing  them  a  free  and  mobile  labor  market. 
In  place  of  the  medley  of  weights  and  measures  of  the 
different  states,  which  were  a  hindrance  to  commerce,  a 
uniform    plan    was    adopted,    based    upon    the    metric    and 


PROGRESSIVE  LEGISLATION  271 

decimal  systems.  A  single  monetary  system  was  also  de- 
creed in  place  of  the  great  variety  of  currencies  in  vogue. 
The  formation  of  business  corporations  was  encouraged. 
Laws  limiting  the  rate  of  interest  were  abolished.  The  postal 
system  was  reorganized.  Commercial  treaties  were  made 
with  other  nations.  Workingmen  were  given  the  right  to 
form  unions.  The  results  of  all  this  activity  were  notable. 
The  pecuniary  advantage  of  large  and  influential  classes  lay 
in  the  success  of  the  Confederation.  Economic  life  bound 
the  different  states  every  year  more  tightly  together. 

Meanwhile  Germans  were  biding  the  time  when  by  the 
addition  of  the  South  German  states  the  political  unity 
would  be  complete.  This  was  to  be  the  result  of  the  Franco- 
German  war  of  1870. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE   TRANSFORMATION   OF  THE   SECOND 
EMPIRE 

We  have  traced  the  rise  of  Italy,  the  rise  of  Prussia.  We 
have  now  to  trace  the  decline  and  fall  of  the  French  Empire. 
The  history  of  that  Empire  from  its  foundation  in  1852  to 
1860  has  been  described.  It  was  a  period  of  despotic 
government,  and  of  great  and  uninterrupted  success.  The 
period  from  1860  to  1870  witnesses  the  gradual  transforma- 
tion of  the  Empire  from  autocracy  to  liberalism,  the  rise 
of  a  vigorous  party  of  opposition,  a  disastrous  foreign 
policy,  a  growing  demoralization  within  the  state,  and  a 
final,  tragic  collapse. 
Disastrous  The  turning  point  in  the  history  of  the  Empire  was  the 

^,  ,.  Italian  war.      However  beneficial  to  Italy,  that  war  raised 

Italian   war  _        . 

upon  Napo-  up  for  Napoleon  a  host  of  enemies  in  France.  One  of 
leon  III.  its  features  had  been  the  attack  upon  the  temporal  power 
of  the  Papacy.  That  power  was  not  overthrown  in  fact, 
but  it  was  in  principle.  The  Pope  had  lost  most  of  his 
states,  the  rest  were  in  danger.  Catholics  were  bitter  in 
their  denunciation  of  Napoleon.  This  was  most  damaging 
for  him,  as  his  strongest  supporters  had  hitherto  been  the 
clergy,  the  clerical  press,  and  the  faithful.  But  other 
groups  also  were  offended:  monarchists,  because  of  the 
overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  Naples  and  the  duchies ;  patriots 
of  various  affiliations  and  members  of  the  liberal  constitu- 
tional party  in  Parliament,  because  they  believed  the  erec- 
tion of  a  strong  state  to  the  southeast  of  France  prejudicial 
to  her  best  interests,  it  being  better  to  have  several  weak 
states  as  neighbors  than  a  single  strong  one. 

272 


EFFECT  OF  THE  ITALIAN  WAR  OF  1859       273 

Only  the  democratic  party  in  France  seemed  pleased  with  The  war 
this  venture,  and  for  reasons  that  might  well  give  the  Em-  ^^,     ,      ^.^^ 
peror  pause.     This  was  the  smallest  of  all  the  parties.     It  democratic 
was    by    its    fundamental    principles    opposed    to    the    very  party, 
existence  of  the  Empire.      "  To  find  partisans  of  an  Italian 
war,  one  must  seek  them  in  those  circles  which  are  plotting 
the  overthrow  of  the  Empire,"  an  official  had  reported  to 
the  Emperor  before  ever  the  war  had  begun.     These  demo- 
crats approved  a  war  against  Austria,  the  traditional  op- 
ponent of  liberalism.      They  favored  a  war  that  might  dam- 
age another  enemy  of  theirs,  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
They  applauded  it  warmly  because  its  tendency  seemed  to  be 
inevitably  democratic  and  anti-clerical.     They  were  pleased 
to  have  the  Emperor  enter  upon  a  doubtful  adventure,  be- 
lieving that  one  adventure  might  lead  to  others,  that  he  would 
alienate  former  supporters,  and  would  therefore  be  forced  to 
seek  new  ones,  and  that  thus  a  situation  favorable  to  them- 
selves might  be  created.     But  even  they  were  disappointed 
at  the  outcome  of  the  war  and  were  therefore  critical.     The 
Austrians  were  still  in  Venetia ;  the  Pope  was  still  in  Rome. 

The  Emperor's  reputation  as  a  ruler,  of  intelligent  views  Napoleon  s 
and  of  decision  of  character,  was  damaged  both  at  home  and 
abroad.  As  the  war  progressed  it  revealed  the  lack  in 
its  author  of  any  definite  purpose  to  be  vigorously  adhered 
to.  Napoleon  III  at  first  agreeing  to  drive  the  Austrians 
out  of  the  peninsula  and  to  free  Italy  from  the  Alps  to  the 
Adriatic,  then  stopping  midway  in  the  process  and  dictating 
the  Preliminaries  of  Villafranca  and  the  Peace  of  Zurich,  only 
to  permit  them  both  to  become  immediately  dead  letters,  and 
watching  the  revolution,  unchained  by  his  act,  progress  until 
the  most  sweeping  change  in  Italian  history  had  been  effected 
and  unification  had  been  practically  achieved.  By  a  policy, 
alternately  so  reckless  and  so  pusillanimous,  he  lessened  his 
prestige,  for  he  showed  that  though  he  could  inaugurate 
momentous  movements,  he  had  not  the  power  or  sagacity 
or  courage  to  control  them.      By  participating  in  the  over- 


274    TRANSFORMATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 


England 
offended. 


Treaty  of 
commerce 
offends 
Protec- 
tionists. 


throw  of  long-established,  legitimate  governments,  he  made 
legitimate  governments  everywhere  suspicious  and  even  hos- 
tile; by  declaring  that  he  was  seeking  only  justice  and 
not  aggrandizement  and  then  adding  Savoy  and  Nice  to 
France  as  payment  for  liis  services,  he  alienated  England, 
as  well  as  other  states,  which  saw  only  hypocrisy  in  his 
acts  and  which  feared  that  he  was  desirous  of  repeating  the 
policy  of  conquest  of  his  illustrious  uncle.  Such  was  the 
outcome  of  a  policy,  fortunate  for  the  Italians,  unfortunate 
for  the  Emperor.  The  next  decade  is  a  long  commentary 
upon  Napoleon's  initial  error.  For  ten  years  he  was  to 
experience  to  the  full  the  embarrassments  created  by  his 
ill-advised  Italian  policy. 

It  was  at  this  time  that  in  a  different  sphere  he  offended 
another  powerful  interest  at  home.  He  made  in  1860, 
with  unusual  secrecy,  a  treaty  of  commerce  with  England. 
This  treaty  involved  a  great  reduction  of  duties  on  many 
articles,  and  was  a  step  in  the  direction  of  free  trade.  While 
popular  with  political  economists,  and  while  probably  ad- 
vantageous to  France  as  a  whole,  it  was  bitterly  resented 
by  the  great  manufacturers,  who,  given  no  warning  and 
therefore  no  time  to  adapt  themselves  to  changed  conditions, 
believed  that  they  would  be  utterly  ruined.  Four  hundred 
of  them  came  to  Paris  to  seek  an  audience  with  the  Em- 
peror in  order  to  present  their  cause.  They  were  un- 
successful. The  audience  was  not  granted,  but  they  pub- 
lished a  vehement  protest  against  the  new  policy,  "  We  are 
about  to  be  condemned  without  having  been  heard."  But 
while  the  manufacturers  were  indignant,  many  in  France 
were  grateful,  notably  the  wine  producers,  who,  according 
to  the  new  treaty,  would  have  a  larger  market  in  England 
than  ever.  But  the  Emperor  had  thus  by  1860  offended 
large  and  influential  classes:  Catholics  in  their  beliefs  by 
his  Italian  policy ;  manufacturers,  protectionists,  in  their 
interests  by  his  treaty  of  commerce,  a  treaty  which,  it  was 
declared,  sacrificed  French  interests  to  English,  as  the  war, 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  LIBERAL  EMPIRE     275 

it   was   likewise  declared,   had   subordinated  the  welfare   of 
France  to  that  of  Italy. 

Feeling  that  he  was  losing  strength  with  the  Conservatives,  Napoleon 
Napoleon  now  began  to  seek  the  support  of  the  Liberals,  ^^^  liberals, 
hitherto  his  bitter  opponents.  This  was  the  beginning  of 
the  so-called  Liberal  Empire,  marked,  as  the  years  went,  by 
ever  greater  concessions,  until  at  the  end  the  character  of 
the  government  was  completely  transformed.  Thus  in  1859 
Napoleon  issued  an  amnesty  which  permitted  the  Repub- 
licans who  had  been  driven  from  France  by  the  coup  d'etat 
of  1851  to  return.  Many  were  prisoners  in  Algeria,  in 
Guiana.  Many  were  exiles  in  Belgium,  Switzerland,  Eng- 
land. From  these  countries  the  exiles  now  came  back, 
but  not  all  of  them.  "  I  shall  return,"  said  Victor  Hugo, 
" "  when  Liberty  returns." 

Napoleon  next  took  a  step  which  seemed  to  indicate  that 

he   was    finally    to    enter    upon    the   work    of   crowning   his 

regime  with  liberty,  which  he  had  declared  to  be  the  ideal 

of  the  Napoleonic  system.      In  November  1860  he  slightly 

enlarged  the  power  of  the  legislature.       By  the  decree  of  Powers  of 

Pfl.rlifl.Tttcut 
November  24th  he  gave   the   Senate  and  Legislative  Body  ij,„_g„gpj 

the  right  at  the  opening  of  each  session  to  frame  an  address 

to   the  monarch  in   reply  to   his   address   from  the  throne. 

Such  was  the  custom  in  England,  and  such  had  been  the 

custom  in  France  under  the  parliamentary  monarchy  from 

1815  to  1848.     This  gave  the  legislature  the  chance  once 

a  year  to  discuss  the  whole  policy  of  the  Government,  as 

each  phrase  of  the  address  was  being  composed  and  debated. 

Everything  could  be  passed  in  review  at  that  time.      Another 

innovation,  hardly  less  noteworthy,  was  made  at  the  same 

time.       A   full   stenographic   report   of   the   sessions   of  the 

Legislative  Body  was  henceforth  to  be  published.     The  people 

were  no  longer  to  be  required  to  content  themselves  with  a 

concise,  dry,  analytical  report  of  these  sessions,   relegated 

to  the  most  obscure  part  of  the  paper,  but  now  the  eloquence 

of  the  Chamber  might  be  known  to   all  the  country,  im- 


«76    TRANSFORMATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 


Revival  of 
interest  in. 
politics. 


Hise  of  a 

Republican 

Party. 


passioned,  incisive,  instructive.  Another  article  provided 
that  henceforth  ministers,  representing  the  Government, 
should  appear  before  the  Chambers  authorized  to  explain 
and  defend  its  policy. 

Though  by  this  famous  decree  Napoleon  III  divested  him- 
self of  none  of  his  prerogatives,  nevertheless  the  importance 
of  Parliament  was  henceforth  increased.  This  was  the  first 
and  most  important  of  the  successive  steps  in  the  evolution 
of  the  autocratic  into  the  liberal  Empire.  But  the  Emperor 
was  mistaken  in  supposing  that  he  could  win  the  Liberals 
to  his  side.  He  was  simply  giving  them  greater  oppor- 
tunities for  opposition.  Under  the  operation  of  this  decree 
parliamentary  life  awoke  again  in  France.  Communication 
betv/een  the  Legislative  Body  and  the  country,  broken  since 
1852,  was  re-established.  Extraordinary  interest  was  shown 
by  the  people  in  the  next  session  of  that  Chamber,  which 
was  characterized  by  much  brilliant  oratory  and  keen  criti- 
cism. It  was  noted  with  surprise  that  many  of  the  most 
effective  speeches  were  directed  against  this  or  that  phase 
of  the  imperial  government.  The  Emperor  had  evoked  a 
spirit  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  suppress.  The  Opposition 
in  the  Chamber  was  small  numerically,  but  was  aggressive. 
That  it  produced  some  effect  was  shown  by  the  next  elec- 
tions, those  of  1863,  when  its  number  increased  from  five 
to  thirty-five,  of  whom  seventeen  were  out-and-out  Repub- 
licans. This  was,  of  course,  a  powerless  minority  in 
a  chamber  of  nearly  260  members.  But  the  popular 
vote  was  significant.  The  opponents  of  the  Empire, 
Catholics,  Protectionists,  Monarchists,  Republicans,  had 
obtained  about  two  million  votes — almost  a  third  of  those 
cast. 

It  was  just  this  time,  when  various  difficulties  were  arising 
about  him  more  troublesome  than  any  which  he  had  previously 
encountered,  that  Napoleon  chose  for  another  enterprise 
most  unnecessary,  most  reckless,  and  in  the  end  most  dis- 
astrous.     He  undertook  to  erect  an  empire  five  thousand 


THE  MEXICAN  EXPEDITION  277 

miles  away,  in  a  country  of  which  he  knew  but  little,  and 

in  which  political  institutions  had  for  half  a  century  rested 

on  a  very  shifting  basis — Mexico. 

England,  Spain,  and  France  had  certain  grievances  against  The 

Mexico  for  her  uniust  treatment  of  their  citizens   resident  ^e^^can 

^  expedition, 

there,    and    when    the    Mexican    Government    suspended    by 

arbitrary  decree  the  payment  of  interest  on  bonds  held 
abroad,  they  proceeded  to  organize  an  intervention.  They 
were  the  more  able  to  do  this  than  in  ordinary  times,  owing 
to  the  fact  that  the  United  States,  the  natural  opponent 
of  any  such  intervention,  was  then  involved  in  a  civil  war 
that  forbade  her  attempting  to  prevent  it.  Consequently, 
in  October  1861  these  three  powers  signed  the  Treaty  of 
London  agreeing  upon  joint  intervention  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  securing  adequate  protection  for  Europeans  resident 
in  Mexico,  and  the  proper  discharge  of  financial  obligations 
incurred  by  that  country  by  previous  treaties.  The  Allies 
expressly  stated  that  they  had  no  intention  of  making  terri- 
torial conquests  or  of  overthrowing  the  existing  Mexican  gov- 
ernment, which  was  a  republic  under  Juarez  as  president. 
The  expedition  was  sent  out,  arriving  in  December  1861 
and  January  1862.  But  by  April  it  became  clear  to  Spain 
and  England  that  France  had  distinctly  other  purposes  in 
this  affair  than  those  stated  in  the  treaty  of  alliance.  Na- 
poleon's real  intentions,  shortly  apparent,  were  the  over- 
throw of  the  republic  and  the  establishment  of  a  monarchy 
in  Mexico  under  a  European  prince.  The  English  and 
Spaniards  would  give  no  sanction  to  such  a  scheme,  and 
consequently  enjbirely  withdrew  in  April  1862.  The  ex- 
pedition now  became  one  purely  French.  The  question 
of  financial  honesty  on  the  part  of  Mexico  was  lost  sight 
of,  and  a  war  began,  a  war  of  aggression,  entirely  uncalled 
for,  but  a  war  which  in  the  end  punished  its  author  more 
than  it  did  the  Mexicans,  one  of  the  most  dishonorable,  as 
it  was  one  of  the  most  costly  and  disastrous,  for  the  Second 
Empire. 


278    TRANSFORMATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 


Napoleon's 
purposes. 


Napoleon 
overthrows 
the  Mexican 
Republic.        I'eign 


Napoleon  III  was  a  man  of  ideas,  a  man  of  imagination, 
with  a  mind  ranging  boldly  and  far  at  times.  His  ideas 
were  frequently  grandiose,  yet  vague  and  dim,  his  imagina- 
tion lively,  3^et  frequently  unsound,  superficial,  deceptive. 
While  a  prisoner  in  the  fortress  of  Ham  he  had  written 
and  published  a  pamphlet  concerning  America.  In  this 
he  proclaimed  the  necessity  of  digging  a  great  canal  to 
connect  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific.  On  it  a  "  new  Constanti- 
nople "  might  arise,  near  the  borders  of  North  America  and 
South  America,  as  ancient  Byzantium  had  arisen  at  the 
point  where  Europe  and  Asia  meet.  The  founder  of  such 
a  place  might  work  out  for  the  new  world  what  had  been 
worked  out  in  Europe — an  equilibrium  of  the  different  forces 
— by  strengthening  the  enfeebled  Latin  element  and  hemming 
in  the  overflowing  Anglo-Saxon  element. 

The  theory  of  nationalities  would  thus  win  another  vic- 
tory. Latins  would  hold  in  check  the  aggressive  Anglo- 
Saxons.  The  colonies  of  Spain  and  France  would  be  more 
secure,  French  commerce  would  find  new  outlets,  the  ma- 
terials for  French  industries  would  be  more  easily  procured. 
And,  said  Napoleon,  "  We  shall  have  established  our  benefi- 
cent influence  in  the  center  of  America."  Another  reason 
may  have  influenced  the  Emperor.  The  Republic  of  Mexico 
had  in  some  of  its  legislation  deeply  offended  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  Might  he  not  win  back  the  favor  of 
Catholics  forfeited  by  his  Italian  expedition  by  undertaking 
this  one? 

This  expedition  for  the  overthrow  of  the  Mexican  Republic, 
pronounced  by  courtiers  "  the  grandest  thought  of  the 
was  a  long  drawn  out  folly.  The  French  troops 
were  checked  at  Puebla  on  May  5,  1862 — the  first  military 
defeat  of  the  Empire.  But,  reinforced,  they  were  victorious, 
and  General  Forey,  the  French  commander,  called  together 
an  assembly  of  Mexican  notables  of  the  opposition  party, 
which  decreed  that  Mexico  should  henceforth  be  an  Empire, 
and  which  offered  the  imperial  crown  to  Archduke  Maximilian 


THE  EMPIRE  OF  MEXICO  279 

of  Austria,  brother  of  Francis  Joseph,  since  1848  Emperor 
of  Austria.  This  assembly  represented,  perhaps,  350,000 
people  out  of  about  7,000,000.  It  offered  a  fatal  gift. 
This  young  prince  of  thirty-one  was  of  attractive  and  popu- 
lar manners,  and  of  liberal  ideas.  Young,  handsome,  ver- 
satile, half  poet,  half  scientist,  he  was  living  in  a  superb 
palace,  Miramar,  overlooking  the  Mediterranean,  amid  his 
collections,  his  objects  of  art,  and  with  the  sea  which  was 
his  passion  always  before  him.  From  out  of  this  enchanting 
retreat  he  now  emerged  to  become  the  central  figure  of 
a  short  and  frightful  tragedy.  Mexico  lured  him  to  his 
doom.  Influenced  by  his  own  ambition  and  that  of  his 
spirited  wife,  Carlotta,  daughter  of  Leopold  I,  King  of 
Belgium,  and  receiving  definite  promises  of  French  military 
support  until  1867,  he  accepted  the  imperial  crown  and 
arrived  in  Mexico  in  May  1864. 

This  entire  project,  bom  in  the  brain  of  Napoleon  III,  Disastrous 

was  to  prove  hopeless  from  the  start,  disastrous  to  all  who  outcome  of 

this  3.d— 
participated  m  it,  to  the  new  Emperor  and  Empress,  and  to        , 

Napoleon.  The  difficulties  confronting  the  new  monarch 
were  insuperable.  A  guerilla  warfare  was  carried  on  suc- 
cessfully by  Juarez,  using  up  the  French  soldiers  and  put- 
ting them  on  the  defensive.  Even  the  communications  of 
the  French  army  with  the  sea  were  seriously  threatened. 
Maximilian  at  last  issued  a  decree  that  any  enemies  taken 
with  arms  would  be  summarily  shot — a  decree  that  made 
him  hated  by  all  Mexicans,  and  that  gave  to  the  war  a 
character  of  extreme  atrocity.  A  greater  danger  threatened 
the  new  empire  when  General  Lee  surrendered  at  Appomat- 
tox. The  United  States  had  looked  from  the  first  with 
disapprobation  upon  Napoleon's  project.  Now  that  the  Interven- 
Civil  War  was  over,  she  threatened  intervention.  Napoleon  *^°"  °^  *^® 
was  unwilling  to  risk  a  conflict  with  this  country,  and  con-  state- 
sequently  promised  to  withdraw  his  troops  speedily  from 
Mexico.  Maximilian  could  not  remain  long  an  Emperor 
without  Napoleon's  support.      His  wife,  Carlotta,  return- 


280    TRANSFORMATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 

ing  to  Europe  to  persuade  Napoleon  in  frantic  personal 
interviews  not  to  desert  them,  received  no  promise  of  support 
from  the  man  who  had  planned  the  whole  adventure,  and 
in  the  fearful  agony  of  her  contemplation  of  the  impending 
doom  of  her  husband  became  insane.  Maximilian  was  taken 
by  the  Mexicans  and  shot  June  19,  1867.  The  phantom 
empire  vanished. 
Discom-  A   most  expensive  enterprise   for   the   French  Emperor, 

fiture  of  Na-  j{.  j^^^j  eaten  into  the  financial  resources  of  France,  already 
badly  disorganized.  It  had  prevented  his  playing  a  part 
in  decisive  events  occurring  in  central  Europe  in  1 864-665 
in  the  Danish  war,  and  the  Austro-Prussian  war,  the  out- 
come of  which  was  to  alter  so  seriously  the  importance  of 
France  in  Europe  by  the  exaltation  of  an  ambitious,  aggres- 
sive, and  powerful  military  state,  Prussia.  It  had  damaged 
him  morally  before  Europe  by  the  desertion  of  his  proteges 
to  an  appalling  fate  before  the  threats  of  the  United 
States.  His  army  had  once  been  repelled,  before  Puebla 
in  1862,  the  first  military  defeat  in  his  reign.  He  had 
squandered  uselessly  his  military  resources  and  had  increased 
the  national  debt.  It  has  been  asserted  that  the  Mexican 
war  was  as  disastrous  for  Napoleon  III  as  the  Spanish  war 
had  been  for  Napoleon  I. 

In  1868,  after  the  great  humiliation  resulting  from  the 
Mexican    war    and    from    the    futile    attempts    to    play    an 
effective  part  in  European  diplomacy  in  the  crowded  years 
of   1864-68,   which   will   be   described   later.   Napoleon   III, 
feeling  greatly  the  need  of  new  sources  of  strength,  could 
Additional     only  turn  to  the  Liberals  with  still  larger  concessions.     Other 
concessions    motives  influenced  him  to  go  further  in  this  direction  tJian 
alism  ^^  ^^^  previously   gone.      He   had   declared   at  the   begin- 

ning of  his  reign  that  autocratic  power  was  to  be  merely 
provisional,  that  liberty  should  crown  the  edifice.  Liberal- 
minded  by  nature,  he  saw  that  he  could  not  safely  postpone 
the  day.  Time  was  passing.  Sixteen  years  had  gone  by 
and  the   system   of   1852   was   still   almost   entirely   intact. 


GAMBETTA  ATTACKS  THE  EMPIRE        281 

Moreover,  he  was  now  becoming  prematurely  old,  and  was 
suffering  acutely  from  disease,  a  fact  that  must  be  borne 
in  mind  henceforth  as  helping  to  explain  the  vacillation 
and  languor  at  critical  times  of  this  man,  who  had  pre- 
viously acted  with  decision  and  promptness.  Self-interest 
also  would  be  served  in  another  way.  As  his  policy  was 
now  sadly  compromised  in  every  way,  there  would  be  evident 
advantage  in  making  the  assembly,  the  people,  share  the 
responsibility  with  himself.  In  1867  the  right  of  interpella-  The  right 
tion  was  granted  the  Chamber,  which  gave  its  members  the  of  inter- 
power  to  question  the  ministers  concerning  their  acts  and  o.j.a.nted 
policies  at  any  moment.  In  1868,  upon  the  Emperor's 
recommendation,  a  law  was  passed  freeing  the  press  from 
a  considerable  number  of  restrictions  that  had  previously 
weighted  it ;  also  a  law  permitting,  under  certain  elaborate 
conditions,  the  right  of  holding  public  meetings. 

The  Empire  had  thus  entered  upon  a  frankly  liberal 
path.  The  result  was  not  to  strengthen,  but  greatly  to 
weaken  it.  Many  new  journals  were  founded,  in  which 
it  was  assailed  with  amazing  bitterness.  A  remarkable  free- 
dom of  speech  characterizes  the  last  two  years  of  Napo- 
leon's reign.  A  movement  to  erect  a  monument  to  a 
republican  deputy,  Baudin,  who  had  been  shot  on  the 
barricades  in  1851  at  the  time  of  the  coup  d'etat,  seemed  to 
the  Government  to  be  too  insulting.  It  prosecuted  the 
men  who  were  conducting  the  subscription.  One  of  these 
was  defended  by  a  brilliant,  impassioned  young  lawyer  and 
orator  from  the  south  of  France,  thirty  years  of  age,  who 
was  shortly  to  be  a  great  figure  in  politics,  a  founder  of 
the  Third  Republic.  Gambetta  conducted  himself  not  as  a  Dramatic 
lawyer  defending  his  client,  but  as  an  avenger  of  the  wrongs  ^^^^f^^^^ 
of  France  for  the  past  seventeen  years,  impeaching  bitterly  Gambetta. 
the  entire  reign  of  Napoleon  III.  Particularly  did  he 
dwell  upon  the  date  of  December  2d.  The  coup  d'etat, 
he  said,  was  carried  through  by  a  crowd  of  unknown  men 
"  without  talent,  without  honor,  and  hopelessly  involved  in 


282    TRANSFORMATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 

debts  and  crimes."  "  These  men  pretend  to  have  saved  so- 
ciety. Do  3'ou  save  a  country  when  you  lay  parricidal 
hands  upon  it.'^ "  The  end  of  this  remarkable  discourse 
remains  famous :  "  Listen,  you  who  for  seventeen  years  have 
been  absolute  master  of  France.  The  thing  that  character- 
izes you  best,  because  it  is  evidence  of  your  own  remorse, 
is  the  fact  that  you  have  never  dared  to  say :  We  will  place 
among  the  solemn  festivals  of  France,  we  will  celebrate  as  a 
national  anniversary,  the  Second  of  December.  .  .  .  Well! 
this  aniversary  we  will  take  for  ourselves ;  we  will  observe 
it  always,  always  without  fail ;  every  year  it  shall  be  the 
anniversary  of  our  dead,  until  the  day  when  the  country, 
having  become  master  itself  once  more,  shall  impose  upon 
you  the  great  national  expiation  in  the  name  of  liberty, 
equality,  and  fraternity." 
Bitter  at-  This  address  had  a  prodigious  effect.     Nothing  so  defiant, 

tacks  upon   gQ    contemptuous    of   the    Government,    had   been    heard    in 
__j  France  since  1851.      Though  Gambetta's  client  lost  his  case, 

it  was  generally  felt  that  the  Empire  emerged  from  that 
court-room  soundly  beaten.  It  was  clear  that  there  was 
a  party  in  existence  bent  upon  revenge,  and  willing  to  use 
all  the  privileges  a  now  liberal  Emperor  might  grant,  not 
gratefullj^,  but  as  a  means  of  completely  annihilating  the 
very  Empire,  a  Republican  party,  aggressive,  and  growing, 
already  master  of  Paris,  and  organizing  in  the  depart- 
ments. 
The  Third  There  was  also  in  existence  another  party  which  played 
Party.  q^  commanding  and  decisive  part  in  the  closing  years  of  the 

reign,  the  Third  Party,  so  called  from  the  fact  that  it 
stood  between  the  thorough-going  supporters  of  the  Empire 
and  the  Republicans,  its  active  enemies.  This  party  was 
willing  to  support  the  Empire  loyally  if  Napoleon  would 
make  it  frankly  and  completely  liberal,  that  is,  if  he  would 
substitute  a  completely  parliamentary  system  of  govern- 
ment for  personal  rule.  This  party  was  led  by  Ollivier, 
formerly  a  Republican. 


POPULAR  APPROVAL  OF  THE  EMPIRE     283 

Two  policies  were  now  urged  upon  Napoleon,  one  by 
those  of  liis  immediate  circle — a  return  to  the  strong  meas- 
ures of  1852,  a  renouncement  of  all  compromises  with  the 
Liberals;  the  other,  the  one  advocated  by  the  Third  Party. 
The  elections  of  1869  reinforced  the  latter  by  showing  that, 
though  4,438,000  votes  had  been  cast  for  the  official  can- 
didates, 3,355,000  had  been  cast  for  those  opposed.  Na- 
poleon adopted  the  plan  of  the  Third  Party,  and  by  a 
senatus  considtum  of  September  8,  1869,  supplemented  by 
another  of  April  20,  1870,  the  political  system  of  the 
Empire  was  completely  transformed.  The  Senate  was  de-  ^^^  trans- 
prived  of  its  powers  as  guardian  of  the  Constitution,  and  ^  ., 
became  a  law-making  chamber  simply.  The  Legislative  Body  Empire 
became  complete  master  of  itself,  having  the  right  to  completed, 
choose  its  own  officers,  to  make  its  own  rules,  to  initiate 
legislation,  and  to  demand  explanations  of  the  ministers, 
who  were  declared  responsible.  Finall}^,  on  January  2,  1870, 
Ollivier  was  himself  made  head  of  the  ministry,  and  was 
supported  by  a  majority  of  the  Chamber.  Ollivier  felt  that 
he  could  assure  the  Emperor  a  "  happy  old  age,"  and  his 
son  a  quiet  accession  to  the  throne. 

The  approval  of  the  people  was  now  sought  for  these  Popular 
changes.  As  the  Constitution  of  1852  had  been  ratified  ^PP'^"^^^* 
by  popular  vote,  ought  not  the  Constitution  of  1870,  so 
profoundlj'^  altered  in  the  course  of  the  last  ten  years,  to 
be  likewise  approved.?  Believing  that  a  vote  of  France  on 
all  these  changes  would  only  consolidate  them  and  put  be- 
hind the  Emperor  an  immense  popular  support,  thus  enabling 
him  easily  to  dominate  all  the  hostile  parties  which  had 
recently  become  so  aggressive  and  annoying,  Napoleon  now 
invited  the  people  to  vote  on  this  proposition :  "  The 
French  nation  approves  the  liberal  reforms  made  in  the 
Constitution  since  1860,  and  ratifies  the  senatus  consultum  of 
April  20,  1870."  Then  followed  the  Constitution  in  forty- 
five  articles,  assuring,  among  other  things,  the  transmission 
of  the  imperial  dignity  in  the  direct  line  of  Napoleon  IIL 


284     TRANSFOR^IATION  OF  SECOND  EMPIRE 


The  The  plebiscite  took  place  May  8,  1870,  and  resulted  over- 

Vm^"  ^       whelmingly  in  favor  of  the  Empire,  7,358,786  voted  yes; 

1870.  1,571,939   voted   no.       Napoleon    III    could    claim    that   he 

had  as  many  supporters  in  1870  as  in  1852.  The  Re- 
publicans, a  small  minority,  opposed  this  plebiscite,  not 
because  they  did  not  believe  in  the  right  of  the  people  to 
rule,  but  because  they  considered  it  in  this  case  a  mere  trick 
to  gain  an  apparent  absolution  for  the  sins  of  the  Empire. 
Every  one  must  approve  the  reforms,  but  would  not  such 
a  vote  mean  that  reform  need  go  no  further.''  Now,  said 
Gambetta,  only  one  form  of  government  adequately  ex- 
presses universal  suffrage — the  Republic.  This  party, 
revolutionary  in  its  aims,  appeared  now  to  be  utterly  dis- 
credited by  the  great  success  of  the  Empire  in  the  plebiscite. 
Yet  its  victory  was  very  near.  The  Empire  seemed  solidly 
re-established  upon  the  confidence  of  the  people.  In  less 
than  three  months,  however,  it  had  declared  a  war  against 
Prussia,  in  the  midst  of  which  it  utterly  collapsed  and  was 

Sudden  succeeded  by  the  Republic.     To  understand  the  reasons  for 

CO  apse   0     ^j^j^  sudden  and  complete  downfall,  it  is  necessary  to  surs^ey 
the    Empire.  .  .         .  . 

the  diplomacy  of  the  period  just  preceding   1870,   and  to 

describe  the  general  and  immediate  causes  of  that  war. 


CHAPTER  XIII 
THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

Concerning  that  diplomacy  much  is  known  but  much  re- 
mains obscure.  Not  until  the  archives  of  France  and  Ger- 
many, the  papers  of  Napoleon  III,  William  I,  Bismarck,  and 
their  ministers  and  agents  are  freely  given  to  the  world  will 
it  stand  forth  fully  revealed.  Yet  fragmentary  and  un- 
satisfactory as  our  information  is,  the  broad  outlines  of  the 
story  can  be  drawn  with  reasonable  certitude. 

Up  to  1862  Napoleon  had  been  uniformly  successful.  He 
had  defeated  Russia  and  Austria,  supposed  to  be  the  two 
most  redoubtable  military  powers  in  Europe,  in  the  Crimean 
and  Italian  wars.  In  1862,  however,  he  entered  upon  the 
ill-starred  Mexican  expedition,  the  "  grandest  thought  of  the 
reign,"  as  his  courtiers  mispronounced  it.  This  weakened 
him  in  many  ways,  indicated  above,  but,  particularly  did  it 
trammel  him  in  his  European  diplomacy,  at  the  very  time 
when  events  were  crowding  upon  each  other  thick  and  fast, 
altering  profoundly  the  face  of  Europe.  Napoleon,  dis- 
tracted by  a  wasting,  distant,  and  inglorious  war,  was  not 
able  to  act  with  decision  in  regard  to  the  remodeling  of 
central  Europe,  the  rise  of  Prussia.  Moreover,  his  intel- 
lectual limitations,  his  lack  of  clear  thought  and  persistent 
action,  his  half-hearted,  wavering,  shifting  nature  were  now 
brought  out  in  high  relief  against  the  hard,  practical,  clean- 
cut,  restrained  yet  ruthless  character  of  the  leader  of  this  Napoleon's 
evolution  of  Germany,  Otto  von  Bismarck.  His  doctrine  of  ^^"^^se 
nationalities,  on  which  he  so  prided  himself,  was  now  to  turn  ^^  j^.^ 
against  him  to  his  own  undoing.  He  had  acted  upon  that  doctrine  of 
doctrine  in  Italy  with  the  result  that  an  Italian  Kingdom  iiation- 

•  •  •  •  •  3.1itii6S 

was  m  existence.      He  now,  with  singular  fatuity,  helped 

285 


286  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

forward  the  development  of  another  state  on  the  frontiers 
of  France — Prussia.  In  the  Schleswig-Holstein  affair  of 
186-i  he  secretly  advised  Pinissia  to  take  both  duchies.  "  I 
shall  always  be  consistent  in  my  conduct,"  he  had  said  in 
1863.  "If  I  have  fought  for  the  independence  of  Italy, 
if  I  have  lifted  up  my  voice  for  the  Polish  nationalities, 
I  cannot  have  other  sentiments  in  Germany,  nor  obey  other 
principles."  The  strengthening  of  Prussia  was  a  far  more 
serious  matter  for  France  than  the  strengthening  of  Pied- 
mont, as  Prussia  held  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine,  the  Rhine 
provinces,  wliich  Frenchmen  regarded  as  rightfully  theirs. 
Frenchmen  protested  against  this  dangerous  policy  of  en- 
couraging the  growth  of  the  ambitious  neighbor. 

In  1866  Napoleon  had  an  excellent  opportunity  to  re- 
cover from  his  initial  mistake  in  Germany.  In  that  year 
Prussia  and  Austria  went  to  war,  nominally  over  the  ques- 
tion of  these  very  duchies,  in  reality  for  the  leadership  of 
central  Europe.  Bismarck,  long  planning  such  a  war,  had 
The  been  particularly  anxious  about  the  attitude  of  France,  and 

meeting  at   ]^^^  sought  to  divine  the  probable  conduct  of  the  French 
Si3.rritiz 

Emperor,  in  the  famous  interview  at  Biarritz  (1865).     We 

have  no  official  details  as  to  the  result  of  that  interview, 
but  it  is  clear  that  Bismarck  left  it  with  the  conviction  that 
Napoleon  would  be  neutral.  This  would  free  Prussia  from 
any  anxiety  about  her  western  boundary,  and  she  could 
throw  her  whole  force  to  the  south  against  Austria  and 
her  allies.  It  is  evident  that  Napoleon  looked  forward  to 
such  a  war  between  the  two  German  powers  with  compla- 
cency. He  believed  there  was  nothing  to  fear  from  Prussia. 
He  even  urged  Italy  to  conclude  the  treaty  with  Prussia, 
apparently  thinking  that  the  two  combined  could  hold  out 
longer  against  Austria.  Thus,  in  his  opinion,  the  war 
would  be  long,  exhausting  both  combatants.  At  the  proper 
time  he  could  intervene,  and  from  the  distress  of  the  rivals 
could  extract  gain  for  France,  possibly  the  left  bank  of  the 
Rhine,  wliich  Prussia  might  be  willing  to  relinquish  in  return 


I 


NAPOLEON  III  IN  1866  287 

for  aid.     His  calculation  was  based  upon  his  belief  in  the 
vast  military  superiority  of  Austria.     The  war  came,  and, 
contrary  to  expectation,  it  was  short  and  swift.     Prussia 
was    victorious,    not    Austria.     The    battle   of    Koniggratz, 
or  Sadowa,  July  3,  1866,  was  decisive.     Even  then  it  was 
not   too    late   for    an    intervention.       Napoleon    could   have  Napoleon's 
played  a  commanding  part  in  determining  the  terms  of  peace  ^^i^^^^^  to 
had  he  threatened  to  come  to  the  aid  of  Austria,  as  Austria  opportunity 
desired.     His  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  said  to  him  July  in  1866. 
5th:  "Let  the  Emperor  make  a  simple  military  demonstra- 
tion, and  he  will  be  astonished  at  the  facility  with  which  he 
will  become  arbiter  and  master  of  the  situation  without  strik- 
ing a  blow."     King  William  later  said  that  the  war  of  1866 
was   the   ruin   of  France,   "  because  Napoleon   should  have 
attacked  us  in  the  rear."     This  was  what  Bismarck  most 
feared. 

But  the  golden  hour  slipped  by.  Napoleon  missed  one 
of  the  greatest  opportunities  of  his  entire  career.  Had 
he  refused  to  sanction  the  annexations  of  Prussia  unless 
compensated,  he  could  have  secured  important  additions  to 
France.  Pacifically  inclined,  racked  by  a  disease  which  re- 
duced his  powers  of  concentration  and  decision,  perhaps 
distrustful  of  his  army,  which  was  depleted  by  the  Mexican 
campaign  and  which  had  no  eminent  commander,  his  conduct 
was  vacillating  and  weak.  Accomplishing  nothing  for 
France,  he  yet  irritated  Prussia  by  a  half  measure  of  in- 
sisting that  the  new  confederation  should  not  extend  south 
of  the  river  Main. 

The  year  1866  is  a  turning  point  in  the  history  of  Prussia,  The  year 
of  Austria,  of  France,  of  modern  Europe.      It  profoundly      j-j^jj^™ 
altered  the  historic  balance  of  power.      By  the  decisiveness  point  in 
of  the  campaign,   and  by   the  momentous   character  of  its  modern 
consequences,   Prussia,   hitherto    regarded    as   the   least   im-    ^^     ^° 
portant  of  the  great  powers,  had  astounded  Europe  by  the 
evidence  of  her  strength.      She  possessed  a  remarkable  army 
and  a  remarkable  statesman.       That  both  were  the  most 


S88 


THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 


powerful  in  Europe  was  not  entirely  proved,  but  the  feeling 
was  widespread  that  such  was  the  case.  The  center  of 
interest  in  central  Europe  shifted  from  Vienna  to  Berlin. 
The  reputation  of  Napoleon  III  was  seriously  compromised. 
The  instinct  of  the  French  people  saw  in  the  battle  of 
Koniggratz,  or  Sadowa,  as  they  called  it,  a  humiliating 
defeat  for  France,  though  it  was  a  battle  exclusively  be- 
tween Prussia  and  Austria,  France  being  no  party  to  the 
war.  The  instinct  was  largely  right.  At  least  the  Peace 
of  Prague  involved  and  indicated  the  diminution  of  the 
authority  and  importance  of  France.  For  a  reorganiza- 
tion so  sweeping  in  central  Europe,  as  the  overthrow  of 
Austria,  her  expulsion  from  Germany,  and  the  consolidation 
and  aggrandizement  of  Prussia,  a  powerful  military  state, 
upset  the  balance  of  power.  A  feeling  of  alarm  spread 
through  France.  "  Revenge  for  Sadowa,"  was  a  cry  often 
heard  henceforth.  Its  meaning  was  that  if  one  state  like 
Prussia  should  be  increased  in  area  and  power,  France 
also,  for  consenting  to  it,  had  a  right  to  a  proportionate 
increase,  that  the  reciprocal  relations  might  remain  the  same. 
The  hold  of  the  Emperor  upon  his  own  people  was  greatly 
weakened,  and  Napoleon  knew  it.  To  recover  this,  to  re- 
new his  prestige  by  securing  an  increase  of  territory,  he 
now  resorted  to  diplomacy,  seeking  to  appeal  to  the  gener- 
osity or  gratitude  of  Bismarck,  having  neglected  to  appeal 
to  his  fears.  For  a  year  negotiations  went  on,  in  1866  and 
1867,  between  the  two  powers,  looking  to  some  possible 
enlargement  of  the  boundaries  of  France.  These  negotia- 
tions concerned,  now  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine,  now  Luxem- 
burg, now  Belgium.  Bismarck  drew  them  out  in  order 
to  gain  time  and  also  evidence  with  which  to  discredit 
Napoleon  still  further.  Then,  at  the  ripe  moment,  he 
blocked  every  proposal,  and  no  course  was  left  open  to  the 
French  Emperor  but  to  adapt  himself  to  his  unhappy  posi- 
tion. But  French  governmental  circles,  greatly  chagrined 
and  embittered,  came  more  and  more  to  entertain  the  Idea 


FRICTION  BETWEEN  FRANCE  AND  PRUSSIA    289 

of  war.  The  Emperor  tried  to  persuade  France  that  all 
these  changes  in  central  Europe  had  really  increased  the 
strength  of  France.  The  argument  was  labored,  and,  more- 
over, reacted  most  disastrously,  for  when  in  1868  he  urged 
the  reform  of  the  French  army,  largely  along  the  lines  of 
the  Prussian  organization,  which  had  proved  so  successful, 
the  Chamber  acceded  only  in  slight  part,  quoting  his  own 
assertion  that  France  stood  in  Europe  stronger  than  ever 
as  a  result  of  the  Seven  Weeks'  War  in  Germany.  Thus 
the  one  method  of  augmenting  the  influence  of  France  was 
rejected,  and  Parliament  must  share  the  responsibility  of 
the  lack  of  preparation  of  1870  with  the  Emperor  and 
Liberals  must  share  it  with  Conservatives.  A  few  years 
earlier  Napoleon  might  have  forced  such  proposals  through 
Parliament.  In  1868  he  was  no  longer  in  a  position  so 
to  do.  The  Opposition  was  too  numerous,  and  he  had 
made  too  many  enemies  by  his  Italian  and  Mexican  policies. 
Moreover,  he  had  just  increased  the  power  of  the  legislature. 
And  not  for  a  moment  admitting  that  the  Empire  was  in 
danger,  he  could  not  use  the  greatest  of  all  arguments — 
the  safety  of  the  state. 

From  1866  to  1870  the  idea  that  ultimately  a  war  would 
come  between  Prussia  and  France  became  familiar  to  the 
people  and  Governments  of  both  countries.  Many  Frenchmen 
desired  "  revenge  for  Sadowa."  Prussians  were  proud  and 
elated  at  their  two  successful  wars,  and  intensely  conscious 
of  their  new  position  in  Europe.  The  newspapers  of  both 
countries  during  the  next  four  years  were  full  of  crimina- 
tion and  recrimination,  of  abuse  and  taunt,  the  Government 
in  neither  case  greatly  discouraging  their  unwise  conduct, 
at  times  even  inspiring  and  directing  it.  Such  an  atmosphere 
was  an  excellent  one  for  ministers  who  wanted  war  to  work 
in,  and  both  France  and  Prussia  had  just  such  ministers.  Bismarck 

Bismarck  believed  such  a  war  inevitable,  and,  in  his  opinion,  regards  a 

p  1     .  1  .-2         ''^^^  with 

it  was  desirable  as  the  only  way  of  completmg  the  uninca-  prance  as 

tion  of  Germany,  since  Napoleon  would  never  willingly  con-  inevitable. 


S90 


THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 


The 

Spanish 
candidacy 
of  Leopold 
of  Hohen- 
zollem. 


sent  to  the  extension  of  the  Confederation  to  include  the 
South  German  states.  All  that  he  desired  was  that  it  should 
come  at  precisely  the  right  moment,  when  Prussia  was 
entirely  ready,  and  that  it  should  come  by  act  of  France, 
60  that  Prussia  could  pose  before  Europe  as  merely  defend- 
ing herself  against  a  wanton  aggressor.  In  his  Remi- 
niscences he  avows  that  he  entertained  this  belief  as  early 
as  1866 :  "  That  a  war  with  France  would  succeed  the 
war  with  Austna  lay  in  the  logic  of  history  " ;  and  again, 
"  I  did  not  doubt  that  a  Franco-German  war  must  take 
place  before  the  construction  of  a  United  Germany  could 
be  realized."  The  unification  of  Germany  being  his  supreme 
aim,  he  was  bound  by  logic  and  ambition  to  see  that  that 
war  occurred. 

Unfortunately,  there  entered  in  1870  into  the  Foreign 
Office  of  France  a  pronounced  and  bitter  opponent  of  Prus- 
sia, the  Duke  of  Gramont,  a  reckless  and  unwise  politician, 
whose  brief  career  in  office  was  to  be  very  costly  to  his 
country.  With  two  such  willing  ministers,  a  cause  of  war 
was  not  long  in  being  found.  It  was  offered  in  a  form  which 
did  not  directly  concern  either  Germany  or  France,  the 
filling  of  the  vacant  throne  of  Spain. 

In  1868  a  revolution  had  occurred  in  Spain,  which  re- 
sulted in  the  overthrow  and  exile  of  the  Queen  Isabella  II. 
The  Provisional  Government  which  then  arose  proceeded  upon 
the  task,  always  delicate,  of  finding  a  new  ruler.  It  chose 
Prince  Leopold  of  Hohenzollern,  a  kinsman  of  the  King  of 
Prussia,  who  at  first  declined.  Three  times  the  offer  of 
the  Spanish  crown  was  made  to  Leopold,  twice  in  1869, 
and  again  in  March  18T0.  In  an  interview  with  Bismarck  in 
May  1869  Benedetti,  French  ambassador  at  Berlin,  made  it 
apparent  that  the  candidacy  of  the  Prince  would  be  resented 
by  France.  Bismarck  nevertheless  secured  from  Spain  a 
fourth  offer,  and  Leopold  this  time  accepted,  largely  per- 
suaded thereto  by  Bismarck,  sufficiently  cognizant  of  the  feel- 
ing of  the  French  Emperor.    The  news  that  a  Prussian  Prince 


THE  HOHENZOLLERN  CANDIDACY         291 

had  accepted  the  throne  of  Spain  reached  Paris  by  way  of 
Madrid,  July  2,  1870.  Instantly  great  indignation  was 
expressed  in  the  newspapers.  The  excitement  in  Paris 
rapidly  increased.  Gramont  declared  in  the  Chamber  that 
the  election  of  the  Prince  was  inadmissible  as  "  upsetting 
to  our  disadvantage  the  present  equilibrium  of  forces 
in  Europe,"  and  imperiling  "  the  interests  and  honor  of 
France."  To  prevent  it,  "  we  shall  discharge  our  duty 
without  hesitation  and  without  weakness."  Benedetti  was 
ordered  by  the  French  Government  to  proceed  at  once  to 
Ems,  a  watering  resort  near  the  Rhine,  where  King  William 
was  at  the  time,  and  to  make  a  formal  demand  that  the 
candidacy  be  withdrawn.  Now  neither  Napoleon  III,  more 
and  more  exhausted  by  disease,  nor  the  Prime  Minister, 
Ollivier,  desired  war,  though  both  were  anxious  for  a  diplo- 
matic victory.  Nor  did  William  I  desire  it.  Moreover, 
the  Governments  of  England,  Austria,  Russia,  and  Belgium 
labored  in  the  interests  of  peace.      On  July  12th  the  can-  The  candi- 

didacy  was  announced  withdrawn  by  the  father  of  Prince  ^^^'^  "^^*^* 

drawn. 
Leopold. 

The  tension  was  immediately  relieved:  the  war  scare  was 
over.  Two  men,  however,  were  not  pleased  by  this  out- 
come, Gramont  and  Bismarck.  This  was,  says  a  biogra- 
pher of  Bismarck,  "  the  severest  check  which  Bismarck's 
policy  had  yet  received;  he  had  persuaded  the  Prince  to 
accept  against  his  will;  he  had  persuaded  the  King  reluc- 
tantly to  keep  the  negotiations  secret  from  Napoleon;  how- 
ever others  might  disguise  the  truth  he  knew  that  they 
had  had  to  retreat  from  an  untenable  position,  and  retreat 
before  the  noisy  insults  of  the  French  press  and  the  open 
menace  of  the  French  Government."  *  Bismarck  con- 
sidered the  reverse  so  great  and  humiliating  that  he  thought 
he  must  in  self-respect  resign  and  retire  into  private  life. 

He  was  to  be  saved  from  this  by  the  folly  of  the  French  ^°  ^° 

-^  -^  .    .  the  Duke  of 

ministry,  and  by  his  own  unscrupulousness.     ^'  The  ministry  Gramont. 

*  Headlam,   Bismarck,  334. 


S92  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

has  achieved,"  said  Guizot,  now  a  very  old  man,  living  in 
retirement,  "  the  finest  diplomatic  victory  which  has  been 
won  in  my  lifetime."  This  victory  was  now  thrown  away. 
The  whole  matter  was  unwisely  reopened  and  rendered  far 
more  acute  by  the  French  ministry,  supported  by  the 
Parisian  war  party,  which  now  made  an  additional  demand, 
namely,  that  the  King  of  Prussia  should  promise  that  this 
Hohenzollern  candidacy  should  never  be  renewed.  This 
demand  was  presented  to  WilUam  I  by  Benedetti,  July  13th, 
in  Ems.  The  King  refused  but  with  entire  courtesy.  In  the 
meeting  of  the  French  ministers,  held  on  the  evening  of  the 
13th,  it  was  not  felt  that  this  refusal  made  war  necessary. 

Meanwhile  King  William  had  caused  a  description  of  the 
events  of  that  day  (July  13th)  to  be  telegraphed  to  Bis- 
marck, who  was  in  Berlin,  leaving  with  him  the  decision  as  to 
whether  the  facts  of  the  new  French  demand  and  his  refusal 
to  entertain  it  be  published.  Here  was  Bismarck's  op- 
portunity, which  he  used  ruthlessly  and  joyously  to  provoke 
the  French  to  declare  war.  The  form  in  which  the  Ems  des- 
patch was  published  was  intended  by  him  to  be  "  a  red  flag 
for  the  Gallic  bull,"  and  certainly  fulfilled  the  intention. 
The  Ems  despatch  was  not  falsified,  as  has  been  frequently 
asserted,  but  it  was  condensed  in  such  a  fashion  that  the 
negotiations  at  Ems  appeared  to  have  been  sharp  and  dis- 
courteous and  abruptly  terminated,  whereas  they  had  been 
courteous  and  respectful  on  both  sides.  While  the  text  of 
the  Ems  despatch  was  not  changed  save  by  excision,  the  tone 
of  it  was  greatly  and  intentionally  altered,  so  that  the 
Prussians  thought  that  their  King,  the  French  that  their 
ambassador,  had  been  insulted.  The  effect  of  its  publication 
on  the  14th  was  instantaneous  and  malign.  It  aroused  the 
indignation  of  both  countries  to  fever  heat.  As  if  it  were 
not  sufficient,  the  newspapers  of  both  teemed  with  false,  abus- 
ive, and  inflammatory  accounts  of  the  events  at  Ems.  The 
voice  of  the  advocates  of  peace  was  drowned  in  the  general 
clamor.     Napoleon  did  not  wish  war,  but  he  was  very  ill, 


FRANCE  DECLARES  WAR 

and  was  swept  from  his  real  convictions  by  the  war  party.  The  war 
The  Empress,  it  appears,  urged  it  out  of  hatred  of  Prussia  P^'^^y  ^^ 
as    a   Protestant   nation,    and   in    the   belief   that    it   would 
strengthen  the  imperial  throne.     The  ministry  went  with  the 
current.     No  one  in  authority  dared  brave  unpopularity  in 
Paris,  and  consequently  war  credits  were  voted  amid  great 
excitement  on  July  15th  and  France  entered  into  the  valley 
of  the  shadow.     Ollivier,  head  of  the  French  ministry,  de- 
clared   that   he    accepted   this    war   "  with    a    light    heart." 
Thiers,  demanding  that  the  Chamber  be  informed  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  despatches  which  were  prompting  such  perilous 
action  and  declaring  that  having  gained  "  the  essential  thing 
we  ought  not  to  break  because  of  a  mere  detail  of  form — 
ought  not  to  effect  a  rupture  on  a  question  of  touchiness  "  France 
was  hissed  in  the  Chamber.     War  was  declared  by  France  declares 

virtually  on  July  15th,  technically  on  July  19th.     Only  ten  3^^  ^^°^ 

'^  _  -^  '  ''  -^        .  ''  Prussia. 

members  in  the  Chamber,  among  whom  were  Thiers  and  Gam- 
betta,  voted  against  it.  Paris  resounded  with  cries,  "  On  to 
Berlin !  "  Victory  seemed  certain.  The  Minister  of  War  was 
confident.  The  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs  believed  that 
within  a  few 'hours  the  triple  alliance  for  which  there  had  been 
negotiations  for  some  time  would  be  concluded  with  Austria 
and  Italy.  The  war  grew  directly  out  of  mere  diplomatic 
fencing.  The  French  people  did  not  desire  it,  only  the  people 
of  Paris,  inflamed  by  an  official  press.  Indeed,  until  it  was 
declared,  the  French  people  hardly  knew  of  the  matter  of 
dispute.  It  came  upon  them  unexpectedly.  The  war  was 
made  by  the  responsible  heads  of  two  Governments.  It  was  in 
its  origin  in  no  sense  national  in  either  country.  Its  im- 
mediate occasion  was  trivial.  But  it  was  the  cause  of  a 
remarkable  display  of  patriotism  in  both  countries. 

The  war  upon  which  the  French  ministry  entered  with 
so  light  a  heart,  was  destined  to  prove  the  most  disastrous 
in   the  history   of  their  country.     In   every   respect  it  was 
begun  under  singularly  inauspicious  circumstances.     France  states  join 
declared   war   upon   Prussia   alone,   but   in    a   manner  that  Prussia. 


isolated. 


^94  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

threw  the  South  Gennan  states,  upon  whose  support  she  had 
counted,  directly  into  the  camp  of  Bismarck.  They  regarded 
the  French  demand,  that  the  King  of  Prussia  should  pledge 
himself  for  all  time  to  forbid  the  Prince  of  Hohenzollern's 
candidature,  as  unnecessary  and  insulting.  At  once  Bavaria 
and  Baden  and  Wiirtemberg  joined  the  campaign  on  the  side 
of  Prussia. 
France  Not   only   Prussia  therefore  but  united   Germany   stood 

confronting  France.  Moreover,  Bismarck's  diplomacy  was 
able  to  isolate  France  from  the  rest  of  Europe.  Bismarck 
published  a  draft  of  a  treaty  drawn  up  some  years  before, 
between  Prussia  and  France,  but  never  signed,  which  pro- 
vided for  tlie  annexation  of  Belgium  to  France.  France 
protested,  but  in  vain,  that  the  treaty  had  been  dictated 
by  Bismarck.  This  so  worked  upon  English  opinion,  wliich 
has  always  opposed  French  extension  northwards,  that  the 
English  Government  immediately  proclaimed  its  neutrality. 
France  had  counted  upon  the  ultimate  aid  of  Austria,  but 
Bismarck  gained  the  support  of  Russia  to  this  extent  that 
Russia  threatened  to  invade  Austria  if  Austria  supported 
France.  Italy,  too,  was  neutralized  by  the  fact  that  she 
could  not  safely  move  alone. 

Thus  at  the  beginning  of  the  month  of  August  it  was 
clear  that  France  would  have  no  ally.  The  French  military 
authorities  made  the  serious  mistake  of  grossly  underestimat- 
ing the  difficulty  of  the  task  before  them.  The  Minister 
of  War  declared  that  France  was  ready,  more  than  ready, 
that  her  preparations  were  more  advanced  than  those  of  the 
enemy.  The  supreme  folly  of  such  an  assertion  was  im- 
mediately shown.  While  the  German  armies  mobilized  and 
advanced  toward  the  frontier  with  amazing  swiftness,  order, 
and  ease,  in  the  French  army  all  was  confusion.  In  Prussia 
everything  had  been  for  years  prepared  and  orders  only 
had  to  be  taken  out  of  their  pigeonholes  and  dated.  In 
France  everything  had  to  be  improvised  in  the  midst  of 
unparalleled   disorder.     Particularly    apparent   was    this    in 


DISORGANIZATION  OF  THE  FRENCH  ARMY    295 

the  case  of  the  reserves.  It  frequently  happened  that  men  The  French 
living  in  the  east  of  France  must  cross  to  the  west  and  get  ^"^y- 
their  arms  and  uniform,  then  recross  to  the  east  to  join 
their  regiments.  Not  only  was  time  lost,  but  the  railway 
system  was  deranged  by  the  crowds  of  men  traveling  to 
and  fro  for  this  purpose.  Also  the  trains,  thus  crowded 
with  soldiers,  were  prevented  from  transporting  adequate 
supplies. 

The  confusion,  the  lack  of  preparation,  the  defects  of 
the  military  machine  were  incredible  and  were  apparent  from 
the  very  first  day.  Despatches  from  corps  commanders  are 
all  in  the  same  strain.  "  We  need  everything,"  wrote  Gen- 
eral de  Failly  on  July  19th.  "We  are  in  want  of  every- 
thing," telegraphed  Bazaine  on  July  21st.  "  Everything  is 
completely  lacking,"  announced  another  a  little  later. 
Marshal  Leboeuf  who,  as  Minister  of  War,  had  declared 
that  everything  was  ready  even  to  the  last  button  on  the 
last  gaiter,  soon  lost  his  optimism,  and  on  July  28th  tele- 
graphed that  his  troops  could  not  advance  because  they 
lacked  bread.  Tents  were  frequently  wanting,  or  there  were 
tents  without  tent  pins.  Pots  and  kettles,  medicines  for 
men  and  for  horses,  means  of  transport,  wagons,  blankets, 
were  frequently  lacking.  There  were  cannon  without  ammu- 
nition, horses  without  harnesses,  machine  guns  without  the 
men  who  knew  how  to  fire  them.  Examples  might  be  end- 
lessly multiplied.  More,  however,  are  needless  to  show  the 
chaos  that  reigned  in  the  French  army.  Frequently  soldiers 
and  even  generals  went  astray,  not  able  to  find  their  places. 
"  Have  arrived  at  Belfort,"  telegraphed  General  Michel  on 
July  21st.  "  Can't  find  my  brigade ;  can't  find  the  general 
of  the  Division.  What  shall  I  do?  Don't  know  where  my 
regiments  are."  It  has  been  observed  that  this  document  is 
probably  unique  in  military  records. 

But  the  French  were  inferior  to  the  Germans  in  numbers  "^^^  numer- 
also.  They  could  put  into  the  field  hardly  300,000  men,  fgrjority  of 
find  they  had  no  reserves  worth  speaking  of  upon  which  to  the  French. 


296 


THE  FRANCO-GERIMAN  WAR 


The 

Germans 
invade 
France. 


draw.  The  Germans  could  put  Into  the  field  nearly  450,000 
men,  and  had  very  large  reserves  which  could  be  gradually 
made  into  new  armies.  Again,  on  the  French  side  there 
was  confusion  in  the  direction  of  the  forces.  The  Emperor 
was  very  ill,  of  the  disease  of  which  he  died  three  years  later, 
yet,  irresolute  and  feeble,  he  was  at  the  outset  commander- 
in-chief.  During  the  first  two  weeks  of  the  war  he  made 
three  different  arrangements  concerning  the  command  of  the 
Army  of  the  Rhine. 

The  French  had  dreamed  of  a  swift  invasion  of  Germany. 
Once  in  central  Germany  they  thought  that  the  South 
Germans  would  rise  to  their  aid,  that  then  Austria  and  Italy 
would  join,  and  the  march  to  Berlin  would  begin.  Nothing 
of  the  sort  occurred.  Their  officers  had  maps  of  Germany, 
which  they  never  needed,  few  of  France.  The  Germans 
crossed  into  Alsace  and  Lorraine,  and  between  August  6th  and 
September  2nd  the  French  suffered  reverse  after  reverse.  On 
the  former  day  MacMahon  was  defeated  in  the  battle  of 
Worth  and  subsidiary  engagements.  The  French  fought 
bravely  and  the  Germans  paid  heavily  for  their  success. 
Nevertheless,  it  was  an  unmistakable  victory.  MacMahon 
retreated  rapidly  to  the  great  camp  at  Chalons,  east  of  Paris. 

West  of  Worth  the  Germans  defeated  the  French  on  the 
same  day  (August  6th)  at  Forbach  and  Spicheren,  and 
drove  the  army  back  toward  Metz,  one  of  the  strongest 
fortresses  in  France.  The  German  armies  pressed  on,  en- 
deavoring to  prevent  Bazaine,  now  commander  of  Metz,  from 
retreating  and  joining  MacMahon.  This  they  succeeded  in 
doing  in  a  series  of  very  bloody  battles,  Borny,  to  the  east 
of  Metz,  on  August  14th;  Mars-la-Tours,  to  the  west,  on 
August  16th;  and  Gravelotte,  also  to  the  west,  on  August 
18th.  The  result  was  that  Bazaine,  with  the  principal  French 
army,  was  bottled  up  in  Metz,  surrounded  by  Germans. 

The  Emperor,  now  fearing  to  return  to  Paris  with  these 
defeats  undermining  his  throne,  conceived  the  unwise  plan 
of  having  MacMahon's  army  move  from  Chalons,  eastward. 


THE  FALL  OF  THE  SECOND  EMPIRE       297 

to  the  relief  of  Metz.  This  it  attempted  but  did  not  accom-  The  battle 
plish.  On  September  1st  the  battle  of  Sedan  was  fought,  °^  ^^*^*"* 
with  the  result  that  the  French  were  surrounded  by  the 
Germans.  On  the  next  day,  September  2nd,  the  French 
army  surrendered  to  the  Germans.  Napoleon  himself  was 
taken  prisoner  of  war.  The  French  lost,  on  September  1st, 
about  17,000  in  killed  and  wounded,  and  21,000  captured 
by  the  enemy.  On  the  2nd  over  81,000  officers  and  men 
surrendered  and  became  prisoners  of  war. 

Disasters  so  appalling  resounded  throughout  the  world. 
France  no  longer  had  an  army;  one  had  capitulated  at 
Sedan ;  the  other  was  locked  up  in  Metz.  The  early  defeats 
of  August  had  been  announced  in  Paris  by  the  Government 
as  victories.  The  deception  could  no  longer  be  maintained. 
On  September  3rd  this  despatch  was  received  from  the 
Emperor :  "  The  army  has  been  defeated  and  is  captive ; 
I  myself  am  a  prisoner."  As  a  prisoner  he  was  no  longer 
head  of  the  government  of  France;  there  was,  as  Thiers 
said,  a  "vacancy  of  power."  On  Sunday,  September  4th, 
the  Legislative  Body  was  convened.  But  it  had  no  time  to 
deliberate.  The  mob  invaded  the  hall  shouting,  "  Down  The  fall  of 
with  the  Empire !  Long  live  the  Republic ! "  Gambetta,  *^^  ^^Vire. 
Jules  Favre  and  Jules  Ferry,  followed  by  the  crowd,  pro- 
ceeded to  the  Hotel  de  Ville  and  there  proclaimed  the  Re- 
public. The  Empress  fled.  A  Goverament  of  National  De- 
fense was  organized,  with  General  Trochu  at  its  head,  which 
was  the  actual  government  of  France  during  the  rest  of 
the  war. 

The  Franco-German  war  lasted  about  six  months,  from 
the  first  of  August  1870,  when  fighting  began,  to  about  the 
first  of  February  1871.  It  falls  naturally  into  two  periods, 
the  imperial  and  the  republican.  During  the  first,  which 
was  limited  to  the  month  of  August,  the  regular  armies 
were,  as  we  have  seen,  destroyed  or  bottled  up.  Then  the 
Empire  collapsed  and  the  Emperor  was  a  prisoner  in  Ger- 
many.    The  second  period  lasted  five  months.     France,  under 


298 


THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 


the  Government  of  National  Defense,  made  a  remarkably 

courageous  and  spirited  defense  under  the  most  discourag- 

ina;  conditions. 

The  Gov-  The  new  Government  of  National  Defense,  thus  impro- 

ernment  of    vised,   and   representing   only   a   spontaneous   movement   of 
National  .    .  in  ■  •         i  i  /. 

Defense  opmion,   never  legally   sanctioned,   was   the   government   oi 

France  till  the  close  of  the  war.  It  threw  all  the  blame  of 
the  war  ozi  Napoleon,  and  declared  itself  ready  for  peace; 
only  it  would  not  consent  to  a  peace  involving  the  violation 
of  the  territory  of  France.  "  Not  an  inch  of  our  soil  will 
we  cede,"  said  Favre,  "  not  a  stone  of  our  fortresses."  As 
Germany  intended  annexations  as  a  result  of  her  victories, 
this  utterance  meant  that  the  war  must  continue. 

The  Germans,  leaving  a  sufficient  army  to  carry  on  the 
siege  of  Metz,  advanced  toward  Paris.  They  began  the 
siege  of  that  city  on  September  19th.  This  siege,  one  of 
the  most  famous  in  history,  lasted  four  months,  and  aston- 
ished Europe.  Immense  stores  had  been  collected  in  the 
city,  the  citizens  were  armed,  and  the  defense  was  energetic. 
The  Parisians  hoped  to  hold  out  long  enough  to  enable 
new  armies  to  be  organized,  and  diplomacy  possibly  to 
intervene.  To  accomplish  the  former  a  delegation  from 
the  Government  of  National  Defense,  headed  by  Gambetta, 
escaped  from  Paris  by  balloon,  and  established  a  branch 
seat  of  government  first  at  Tours,  then  at  Bordeaux.  Gam- 
betta, by  his  immense  energy,  his  eloquence,  his  patriotism, 
was  able  to  raise  new  armies,  whose  resistance  astonished  the 
Gemians,  but  as  they  had  not  time  to  be  thoroughly  trained, 
they  were  unsuccessful.  They  could  not  break  the  immense 
circle  of  iron  that  surrounded  Paris.  After  the  overthrow 
of  the  Empire  the  war  was  reduced  to  the  siege  of  Paris, 
^  and  the  attempts  of  these  improvised  armies  to  break  that 

siege.     These  attempts  were  rendered  all  the  more  hopeless 
The  fall  of    by    the   fall   of   Metz    (October   27,    1870).      Six   thousand 
officers  and  173,000  men  were  forced  by  impending  starva- 
tion  to   surrender,   with   hundreds   of   cannon   and   immense 


Metz. 


THE  SIEGE  OF  PARIS  299 

war  supplies,  the  greatest  capitulation  "  recorded  in  the 
history  of  civilized  nations."  A  month  earlier,  on  Septem- 
ber 28th,  Strassburg  had  surrendered,  and  19,000  soldiers 
had  become  prisoners  of  war. 

The  capitulation  of  Metz  was  particularly  disastrous  be- 
cause it  made  possible  the  sending  of  more  German  armies 
to  reinforce  the  siege  of  Paris,  and  to  attack  the  forces 
which  Gambetta  was,  by  prodigies  of  effort,  creating  in  the 
rest  of  France.  These  armies  could  not  get  to  the  relief 
of  Paris,  nor  could  the  troops  within  Paris  break  through 
to  them.     The  siege  became  simply  a  question  of  endurance. 

The  Germans  began  the  bombardment  of  the  city  early  The  siege 
in  January.  Certain  sections  suffered  terribly,  and  were  ^ans. 
ravaged  by  fires.  Famine  stared  the  Parisians  in  the  face. 
After  November  20th  there  was  no  more  beef  or  lamb  to  be 
had ;  after  December  15th  only  thirty  grammes  of  horse  meat 
a  day  per  person,  which,  moreover,  cost  about  two  dollars 
and  a  half  a  pound;  after  January  15th  the  amount  of 
bread,  a  wretched  stuff,  was  reduced  to  300  grammes.  Peo- 
ple ate  anything  they  could  get,  dogs,  cats,  rats.  The 
market  price  for  rats  was  two  francs  apiece.  By  the 
31st  of  January,  there  would  be  nothing  left  to  eat.  Addi- 
tional suffering  arose  from  the  fact  that  the  winter  was  one 
of  the  coldest  on  record.  Coal  and  fire  wood  were  ex- 
hausted. Trees  in  the  Champs  Elysees  and  the  Bois  de 
Boulogne  were  cut  down,  and  fires  built  in  the  public  squares 
for  the  poor.  Wine  froze  in  casks.  On  January  28th, 
with  famine  almost  upon  her,  Paris  capitulated  after  an 
heroic  resistance.  The  armistice  of  Versailles  was  concluded 
which  really  closed  the  war. 

The    armistice   was    designed    to    permit    elections    to   be  Election  of 
held  throughout  France  for  an  assembly  that  should  pro-  ^  National 
nounce  upon  the  question  of  peace.     As  peace  would  Involve 
the  cession  of  French  territory  to  the  victors,  the  Government 
of  National  Defense  felt  that  the  people  of  France  should 
themselves  decide  a  matter  so  vital.     Elections  were  accord- 


300 


THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 


Thiers 
chosen 
Chief  of 
the   Execu- 
tive. 


Treaty  of 
Frankfort. 


in^ly  held  on  Eebrimry  8,  1871.  The  peasants  voted  over- 
whehuin<>ly  for  those  favoring  peace.  As  Gambetta,  leader 
of  the  Republicans,  favored  war  to  the  bitter  end,  they 
voted  largely  against  the  republican  candidates.  Thus  tlie 
first  Assembly,  elected  under  the  Third  Republic,  was  com- 
posed of  a  majority  of  Monarchists,  divided  into  two  wings, 
the  Legitimists  and  the  Orleanists,  and  a  minority  of  Re- 
publicans. Only  a  handful  of  Bonapartists  were  chosen, 
so  vast  was  the  disgrace  now  attached  to  that  name.  The 
Assembly  met  at  Bordeaux,  February  12th,  and,  believing 
that  if  France  continued  the  war  she  might  ultimately  be 
annihilated,  believing  that  the  fundamental  necessity  of  self- 
preservation  demanded  an  immediate  cessation,  voted  over- 
whelmingly for  peace. 

The  Government  of  National  Defense  now  laid  down  its 
powers,  yielding  to  the  National  Assembly.  This  Assembly 
chose  Thiers  as  "  Chief  of  the  Executive  Power,"  and  em- 
powered him  to  negotiate  with  Bismarck  for  peace.  The 
question  of  the  permanent  government  of  France  was  post- 
poned until  a  more  convenient  season.  Thiers  was  now  the 
most  popular  man  in  France.  He  had,  in  July  1870,  done 
his  utmost  to  prevent  France  from  going  to  war.  He  had, 
during  the  war,  journeyed  from  one  capital  of  Europe  to  an- 
other, London,  St.  Petersburg,  Vienna,  Florence,  on  a  futile 
diplomatic  mission,  seeking  to  win  foreign  support  for  France. 
He  was  over  seventy  years  of  age,  but  was  about  to  render 
his  most  valuable  services  to  France. 

The  terms  of  peace  granted  by  Bismarck  were  extra- 
ordinarily severe.  They  were  laid  down  in  the  preliminary 
Peace  of  Versailles,  February  26,  1871.  France  must 
pay  an  indemnity  of  five  thousand  million  francs  ($1,000,- 
000,000)  within  three  years.  She  must  cede  Alsace  and  a 
large  part  of  Lorraine,  including  the  important  fortress 
of  Metz.  She  was  to  support  a  German  army  of  occupa- 
tion, which  should  be  gradually  withdrawn  as  the  instal- 
ments of  the  war  indemnity  were  paid.     After  much  contro- 


GERMANY  AND  ITALY  ACHIEVE  UNITY       301 

versy  these  preliminaries  were  embodied  in  the  final  Treaty 
of  Frankfort,  signed  May  10,  1871,  and  ratified  by  the 
Assembly  of  Bordeaux  by  433  votes  to  98. 

Meanwhile  other  events  had  occurred  as  a  result  of  this  ^all  of  the 
war.     Italy   had   completed   her  unification   by   seizing   the  p^^gj. 
city  of  Rome,  thus  terminating  the  temporal  rule  of  the  Pope. 
The  Pope  had  been  supported  there  by  a  French  garrison. 
This  was  withdrawn  as  a  result  of  the  battle  of  Sedan,  and 
the   troops   of  Victor  Emmanuel   attacked   the  Pope's   own  Completion 
troops,  defeated  them  after  a  slight  resistance,  and  entered  ^^^^gj^^^Qj^ 
Rome  on  the  20th  of  September  1870.     The  unity  of  Italy 
was   now   consummated   and   Rome  became  the   capital   of 
the  Kingdom. 

A  more  important  consequence  of  the  war  was  the  com-  Completion 

pletion  of  the  unification  of  Germany,  and  the  creation  of  °       erman 
^  .        *'  .  unification, 

the  present  German  Empire.     Bismarck  had  desired  a  war 

with  France  as  necessary  to  complete  the  unity  of  Germany. 
Whether  necessary  or  not,  at  least  that  end  was  now  secured. 
After  the  early  German  victories,  and  during  the  siege  of 
Paris,  negotiations  were  carried  on  between  Prussia  and  the 
South  German  states,  looking  toward  their  entrance  into  the 
Confederation.  In  the  case  of  Bavaria  and  Wiirtemberg, 
states  of  considerable  size,  concessions  had  to  be  made,  pre- 
serving to  them  certain  powers  not  retained  by  the  other 
states.  Finally  treaties  were  drawn  up  and  the  King  of 
Bavaria,  prompted  and  directed  by  Bismarck,  urged 
the  King  of  Prussia,  in  behalf  of  the  princes,  to 
assume  the  headship  of  united  Germany,  and  to  revive  the 
Empire. 

Finally  on  the  18th  of  January  1871,  surrounded  by  the 
princes  of  Germany  and  by  the  generals  of  the  army.  King 
William  I  was  proclaimed  German  Emperor.  This 
memorable  ceremony  is  one  of  the  supreme  ironies  of  history 
as  it  occurred  in  the  Hall  of  Mirrors,  in  the  palace  of 
Versailles,  itself  a  mighty  monument  and  symbol  of 
the    power    and    pride    of    Louis    XIV,    a    power    which 


302  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

had   been    secured   to    some    extent    by    the    humiliation    of 
Germany. 

The  war  of  1866  had  resulted  in  the  expulsion  of  Austria 
from  Germany  and  from  Italy.  The  war  of  1870  completed 
the  unification  of  both  countries.  Berlin  became  the  capital 
of  a  federal  Empire,  Rome  of  a  unified  Kingdom. 


CHAPTER  XIV 
THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

The   Franco-German   war   completed   the   unification    of  Growth  of 
Germany.     That  unification  was,  however,  no  by-product 
of  a  war,  no  astounding  improvisation  of  a  genius  in  politics  Germany 
and    diplomacy.      The    foundations    had    been    laid   before,  since   1815. 
and  the  superstructure  had  been  slowly  and  painfully  built 
up.     Many  forces  had  long  been  co-operating,  as  we  have 
seen,   and   had   at   last   converged  toward   this    triumphant 
issue.     Most  effective  of  all  was  the  passion  for  nationality, 
which  gave  to  the  nineteenth  century  such  elevation  of  emotion 
everywhere.     But  all  these  factors  might  have  failed  of  re- 
sults in  the  domain  of  politics  had  it  not  been  for  the  rise  of  a 
forceful  and  sagacious  statesman  to  a  position  of  vast  power 
in  the  Prussian  state.     How  he  used  that  power  has  been 
shown. 

The  Constitution  of  the  new  state  was  adopted  immediately  Constitu- 
after  the  close  of  the  war  with  France,  and  went  into  force  ., 
April  16,  1871.     In  most  respects  it  is  simply  the  Constitu-  German 
tion  of  the  North  German  Confederation  of  1867.    The  name  Empire. 
Confederation  gives  way  to  that  of  Empire,  and  the  name  of 
Emperor  is  substituted  for  that  of  President.     But  the  Em- 
pire is  a  confederation,  consisting  of  twenty-five  states,  and 
one    imperial    territory,    Alsace-Lorraine.       The    King    of 
Prussia  is  ipso  facto  German  Emperor.     The  Bundesrath 
and  the  Reichstag  continue,  enlarged  by  the  admission  of 
new  members  from  the  new  states,  but  with  practically  the 
same  powers.     The  Emperor  declares  war  with  the  consent  of  The 
the  Bundesrath ;  he  makes   treaties  which,  if  they  concern  ^"^P^'^o^- 
matters  that  fall  within  the  sphere  of  imperial  legislation, 
must  be  ratified  by  Parliament.     He  is  head  of  the  army  and 
navy.     He  is  assisted  by  a  Chancellor  whom  he  appoints,  and 

803 


304f 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


The  Bun- 
desrath. 


The 
Eeichstag. 


A  confed- 
eration of 
monarchical 
states. 


wlioni  lie  removes,  who  is  not  responsible  to  the  Parliament  but 
to  liim  alone.  Under  the  Chancellor  are  various  secretaries 
of  state,  who  simply  administer  departments,  but  who  do  not 
form  a  cabinet  responsible  to  Parliament.  The  Empire  is  a 
constitutional  monarchy,  but  not  a  parliamentary  one. 

Laws  are  made  by  the  Bundesrath  and  tlie  Reichstag. 
The  Bundesrath  consists  of  delegates  appointed  by  the  rulers 
of  the  different  states.  The  votes  of  each  state,  ranging 
in  number  from  one  to  seventeen,  are  cast  only  as  a  unit  and 
that  according  to  the  instinictions  of  the  state  govern- 
ment. The  Reichstag  is  the  only  popular  element  in  the 
Empire.  It  consists  of  397  members,  elected  for  a  term 
of  five  3'ears  by  the  voters,  that  is,  men  twenty-five  years  of 
age  or  older.  The  powers  of  the  Reichstag  are  inferior  to 
those  of  most  of  the  other  popular  chambers  of  Europe.  It 
neither  makes  nor  unmakes  ministries.  While  it,  in  con- 
junction with  the  Bundesrath,  votes  the  appropriations, 
certain  ones,  notably  those  for  the  army,  are  voted  for  a 
period  of  years.  Its  consent  is  required  for  new  taxes, 
whereas  taxes  pre^'iously  levied  continue  to  be  collected 
without  the  consent  of  Parliament  being  secured  again.  The 
matters  on  which  Parliament  may  legislate  are  those  con- 
cerning army,  navy,  commerce,  tariffs,  railways,  postal 
system,  telegraphs,  civil  and  criminal  law.  On  matters  not 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Empire  each  state  legislates 
as  it  chooses.^ 

The  German  Empire  is  unique  among  federal  governments 
in  that  it  is  a  confederation  of  monarchical  states,  which, 
moreover,  are  very  unequal  in  size  and  population,  ranging 
from  Prussia  with  a  population  of  37,000,000,  and  cover- 
ing two-thirds  of  the  territory,  down  to  Schaumburg-Lippe, 
with  a  population  of  45,000.  Three  members  of  the  Empire 
are  republics :  Liibeck,  Bremen,  and  Hamburg.  The  rest 
are    monarchies.     All    have    constitutions    and    legislatures, 

*  The  constitution  is  given  in  Howard,  The  German  Empire,  403-435, 
and  in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions,  I,  335-351. 


THE 

/    GEK>L\N  EMPIRE 
1910. 


ow'i>"^i  S.A .-.SV7.iv .Ulailiiirg.  ^tC.d.Xii-yfMurgOMa. 

- n>i.,nh,ifi,  r^         f   ^""''\       T^       \^.lA:St,.ifMm,iii,i('ii.  S W  .iW.r/' />w//«r 

I        \| 1         r I /  I  v,^^:Siiiin>r/.l/u/-(fStiiiilmhiiU     HV  HalUefk 

'      Tn  ^  '  ?  ^ 


BISMARCK    CHANCELLOR    OF  THE   EMPIRE    305 

more  or  less  liberal.  This  confederation  differs  from  other 
governments  of  its  class  in  that  the  states  are  of  unequal 
voting  power  in  both  houses,  one  state  largely  preponderat- 
ing, Prussia,  a  fact  explained  by  its  great  size,  its  popula- 
tion, and  the  importance  of  its  historic  role. 

Since  1871,  Germany  has  had  three  Emperors,  William  I 
(1871-1888),  Frederick  III  (March  9-June  15,  1888),  and 
William  II,  since  1888. 

The  reign  of  William  I,  as  Emperor,  falls  into  two  periods  ;  Reign  of 

from  1871  to  1878,  a  period  of  internal  administrative  re-  Emperor 

•  x-iiT    William  I. 

forms,   and   of  bitter  struggles   with   the   Roman   Catholic 

Church — and  from  1878  till  1888,  the  year  of  his  death,  a 
period  characterized  by  the  prominence  of  economic  ques- 
tions, of  protection  to  industries,  of  social  reforms,  and  of 

the  acquisition  of  colonies.     During  all  this  time  Bismarck  Bismarck's 
,      „  ,!.„..  „i  ,,  .        .     command- 

was  the  Emperor  s  chief  minister  or  Chancellor.     Having  in  j      position. 

nine  years  made  the  King,  whom  he  found  upon  the  point 
of  abdicating,  the  most  powerful  ruler  in  Europe,  and  having 
given  Germans  unity,  he  remained  the  chief  figure  in  the 
state  twenty  years  longer  until  his  resignation  in  1890. 

His  position  now  was  one  of  immense  prestige  and  author- 
ity. Much  legislation  rendered  desirable  by  the  new  situ- 
ation was  passed  in  the  next  few  years.  Imperial  offices 
were  organized.  An  imperial  bureau  of  railroads  was  estab- 
lished (1873).  In  1873  monometallism  was  adopted  in  the 
place  of  the  confusion  of  groschen,  kreutzer,  which  hindered 
trade.  New  coins  were  issued,  bearing  on  one  side  the  effigy 
of  the  Emperor,  and  on  the  other  the  arms  of  the  Empire — 
"going  to  preach  to  the  people  the  good  news  of  unity." 
The  Imperial  Bank  was  erected  in  1875,  and,  in  1877,  elab- 
orate laws  on  civil  and  criminal  procedure,  on  bankruptcy, 
on  the  judicial  organization,  and  still  later,  a  civil  code, 
were  passed.  A  new  system  of  local  government  was  adopted 
for  cantons,  circles,  or  provinces,  whereby  the  judicial  and 
police  authority  of  the  nobility  was  abolished,  and  more 
power  was  given  the  voters. 


S06 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


THE   KULTURKAMPF 


A  religious 
conflict. 


Causes 
of  the 
Kultur- 
kampf. 


No  sooner  was  the  new  Empire  established  than  it  was 
toni  by  a  fierce  religious  conflict  that  lasted  many  years, 
the  so-called  Kulturkampf,  or  war  for  civilization,  a  contest 
between  the  State  and  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Grer- 
many  had,  since  the  time  of  Luther,  been  divided  among 
the  Protestants  and  Catholics,  the  Protestants  predominat- 
ing. South  German  states,  Bavaria,  Baden,  were  Catholic. 
In  Prussia,  the  stronghold  of  Protestantism,  there  were  two 
strong  Catholic  sections,  to  the  east  in  the  Polish  provinces, 
and  to  the  west  along  the  Rhine.  Many  causes  contributed 
to  the  fanning  of  religious  passions  at  this  time.  By  the 
Prussian  Constitution  of  1850  almost  complete  liberty  of 
action  and  control  of  organization  were  granted  the  Church, 
which  availed  itself  most  energetically  of  the  advantage  thus 
offered.  Religious  societies,  monastic  orders,  missions,  were 
established  widely  and  conducted  an  active  and  uncommonly 
successful  propaganda  during  the  next  fifteen  years.  Prom- 
inent among  these  were  the  Jesuits.  Two  classes  were 
alarmed  by  this  progress,  the  orthodox  Protestants,  and 
those  devoted  to  freedom  of  thought,  who  dreaded  the  rise 
of  religious  fanaticism  as  prejudicial  to  culture. 

The  wars  with  Austria  and  France  increased  the  religious 
disturbance.  They  were  victories  by  a  Protestant  state 
over  two  strongly  Catholic  powers.  Leadership  in  Germany 
had  passed  from  Austria,  in  Europe  from  Austria  and  France, 
to  the  principal  Protestant  nation  of  the  continent,  Prussia. 
In  the  Seven  Weeks'  War, the  Catholic  states, Bavaria, Baden, 
had  sided  with  Austria.  It  was  widely  believed  that  the 
French  war  had  been  largely  occasioned  by  the  Jesuits, 
working  through  the  Empress  Eugenie,  and  animating  her 
ardent  desire  to  humble  the  growing  Protestant  power.  Bis- 
marck shared  this  belief.  The  loss  of  the  Pope's  temporal 
power  just  at  this  time,  1870,  embittered  Catholics.  During 
the  war  of  1870  the  Archbishop  of  Posen  went  to  Versailles 


DOGMA  OF  PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY         307 

to  solicit  Bismarck's  intervention  in  behalf  of  the  Papacy. 
He  was  coldly  received.     Apparently  with  the  purpose  of 
bringing  political  pressure  to  bear  upon  the  Chancellor,  a 
Catholic  party  was  organized  at  once,  the  so-called  Center,  Formation 
and  in  the  election  to  the  first  Imperial  Parliament  it  won  of  the 
sixty-three  seats ;  in  the  election  to  the  Prussian  legislature 
or  Landtag,  forty-seven.     This  party  desired  the  restoration 
of  the  temporal  power  and  the  independence  of  the  Church. 
The  immediate  cause  of  the  conflict  was  the  proclamation 
by  the  Vatican  Council  in  1870  of  the  new  dogma  of  papal  Dogma 
infallibility,  the  dogma  that  the  Pope  can  not  err  "  when  °^  I'apal 
he  defines  ex  cathedra,  and  in  virtue  of  his  apostolic  authority  ^j^ty^ 
any  doctrine  of  faith,  or  morals,"   a  dogma  that  shocked 
Liberals    thoroughly   penetrated   with   the  modern   scientific 
spirit,   and  that  seemed   to   politicians   to   assert  that  the 
Pope  was  superior  to  all  rulers,  and  had  a  claim  upon  the 
loyalty  of  the  faithful  superior  to  that  of  their  sovereigns. 

On  the  promulgation  of  this  dogma  a  conflict  broke  out 
between  the  Church  and  the  State.  In  the  Vatican  Council 
the  Gennan  bishops  had  opposed  the  new  dogma,  but  had 
been  in  the  minority.  It  was  now  required  that  all  bishops 
and  priests  should  subscribe  to  it;  the  large  majority  did 
so,  but  some  refused.  A  leading  opponent  was  Dollinger, 
a  distinguished  professor  and  theologian.  Ordered  to  ex- 
plain the  dogma  in  his  university  of  Munich  he  denied  the 
principles  on  which  it  was  based.  '*  As  a  Christian,  a  theo- 
logian, an  historian  and  a  citizen,  I  cannot  accept  this 
doctrine,"  he  declared.  He  was  accordingly  excommuni- 
cated. As  an  answer  to  this  the  university  elected  him  as 
its  Rector.  The  conflict  quickly  widened,  aff^ecting  schools 
and  parishes.  The  dissidents  called  themselves  Old  Catho-  '^^®  ^^^ 
lies,  proclaiming  their  adherence  to  historic  Catholicism,  but 
rejecting  merely  this  addition  to  their  creed  as  false.  These 
men  were  excommunicated  and  deprived  of  their  positions 
as  priests  or  teachers.  People  were  forbidden  to  attend 
worship  in  churches  where  they  officiated,  students  to  attend 


308  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

the  lectures  of  such  professors.  The  Old  Catholics  thereupon 
appealed  to  the  imperial  and  state  governments  for  pro- 
tection. A  religious  war  was  shortly  in  progress,  which  grew 
more  bitter  each  year.  First  the  Imperial  Parliament  for- 
bade the  religious  orders  to  engage  in  teaching;  then,  in 
1872,  it  expelled  the  Jesuits  from  Germany.     Of  all  legisla- 

The  Falk  tion  enacted  during  this  struggle  the  Falk  or  May  Laws  of 
the  PiTissian  legislature  were  the  most  important  (passed  in 
May  of  three  successive  years,  1873,  1874,  1875).  Bis- 
marck supported  them  on  the  ground  that  the  contest  was 
political,  not  religious,  that  there  must  be  no  state  within 
the  state,  no  power  considering  itself  superior  to  the  estab- 
lished authorities.  The  State  must  be  lay.  He  also  be- 
lieved that  the  whole  movement  was  conducted  by  those 
opposed  to  German  unity.  Anything  that  imperiled  that 
unity  must  be  crushed.  These  May  Laws  gave  the  State 
large  powers  over  the  education  and  appointment  of  the 
clergy.  They  forbade  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  to  in- 
tervene in  any  way  in  civil  affairs,  or  to  coerce  citizens 
or  officials ;  they  required  that  all  clergymen  should  pass 
the  regular  state  examination  of  the  gymnasium,  and  should 
study  theology  for  three  years  at  a  state  university;  that 
all  Catholic  seminaries  should  be  subject  to  state  inspection. 
They  also  established  control  over  the  appointment  and 
dismissal  of  priests.  A  law  was  passed  making  civil  mar- 
riage compulsory.  This  was  to  reduce  the  power  that  priests 
could  exercise  by  refusing  to  marry  a  Catholic  and  a  Protest- 
ant, and  now  even  Old  Catholics.  Religious  orders  were 
suppressed. 

Conflict  of  Against  these  laws  the  Catholics  indignantly  protested. 
The  Pope  declared  them  null  and  void ;  the  clergy  refused 
to  obey  them,  and  the  faithful  rallied  to  the  support  of 
the  clergy.  To  enforce  them  the  Government  resorted  to 
fines,  imprisonment,  deprivation  of  salary,  expulsion  from 
the  country.  The  conflict  spread  everywhere,  into  little 
villages,    as   well    as    into    the    cities,    into    the   universities 


RESISTANCE  OF  CATHOLICS  309 

and    schools.      It    dominated    politics    for    several    years. 
In  over  a  thousand  parishes  in  Prussia,  all  religious  services 
were  suspended  and  churches  were  closed.     There  was  no 
priest  to  baptize  or  to  marry.     Eight   out   of  the   twelve 
bishoprics  were  vacant.     One  bishop  had  fled   to  Austria, 
another  was  in  hiding  in  a  little  village  in  Holland,  and  in 
order  to  visit  his  fellow-Catholics  at  Munich,  had  disguised 
himself  as  a  peddler;  another,  a  cardinal,  had  taken  refuge 
within  the  Vatican  itself.     The  national  life  was  more  and 
more   troubled,   and   the   end   was   not   being   accomplished. 
Indeed,  the  resistance  of  the  Catholics  only  stiffened  under 
what    they    called    this    "  Diocletian    persecution."     In    the 
elections  of  1877  the  Center  succeeded  in  returning  ninety- 
two  members,  and  was  tlie  largest  party  in  the  Reichstag. 
It  was  evident  that  the  policy  was  a  failure.     Other  ques- 
tions were  becoming  prominent,  of  an  economic  and  social 
character,  and  Bismarck  wished  to  be  free  to  handle  tliem. 
Particularly  requiring  attention,  in  his  opinion,  and  that  of 
William    I,    was    a    new    and    most    menacing    party,    the 
Socialist.       Bismarck  therefore  prepared   to  retreat.      The  Bismarck's 
death  of  Pius  IX  in  1878,  and  the  election  of  Leo  XIII, 
a   more   conciliatory   and   diplomatic   Pope,    facilitated   the 
change   of   policy.     From   1878   to    1887   the   anti-clerical 
legislation  was  in  one  detail  after  another  abandoned.     First 
the  May  Laws  were  suspended,  in  1879 ;  then  rescinded  in 
1886;  religious  orders  were  permitted  to  return,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Jesuits  (1887).     Of  the  various  laws  only 
those  concerning  civil  marriage   and  the   civil   registration 
of  births   and  deaths,   and  the  state   inspection   of  schools 
were  left.     In  return  for  the  measures  surrendered  Bismarck 
gained  the  support  of  the  Center  for  laws  which  he  now  had 
more  at  heart. 

The  religious  conflict  lasted  fifteen  years,  and  was  acute 
during  five.  Its  only  permanent  result  was  to  consolidate 
and  strengthen  the  Center  or  Catholic  party,  which  has 
been  ever  since  the  strongest  party  in  this  Protestant  country. 


310 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


Financial 
and  in- 
dustrial 
questions. 


Adoption 
of  the 
policy  of 
protection. 


BISMARCK   AND   THE   POLICY   OF   PROTECTION 

In  1879,  Bismarck  brought  about  a  profound  change  in 
the  financial  and  industrial  policy  of  Germany  by  inducing 
Parliament  to  abandon  the  policy  of  a  low  tariff,  and 
comparative  fre'"  trade,  and  to  adopt  a  system  of  high 
tariff  and  pronounced  protection.  His  purposes  were  two- 
fold. He  wished  to  increase  the  revenue  of  the  Empire  and 
to  encourage  native  industries.  The  income  of  the  Empire 
consisted  mainly  of  customs  duties.  Ftirther  funds  if  neces- 
sary were  furnished  by  the  several  states,  their  quotas  being 
apportioned  according  to  population.  Now  the  revenue 
from  customs  proved  insufficient.  For  some  years  there  had 
been  a  deficit,  which  involved  heavier  and  heavier  taxation 
of  the  states,  to  enable  them  to  meet  the  assessments.  If 
the  revenue  of  the  Empire  should  be  increased  so  that  it 
could  meet  its  own  expenses  and  have  a  surplus,  its  political 
strength  would  be  greatly  augmented.  For,  instead  of  ap- 
pealing to  the  states  for  contributions,  it  could  distribute  the 
surplus  to  the  states,  thus  relieving  them  of  taxation  for 
federal  purposes ;  and  could  also  use  it  as  a  fund  for  the 
social  reforms  which  Bismarck  had  in  mind  and  which  will 
shortly  be  described. 

Moreover,  Bismarck  now  desired  high  tariff  duties  in  order 
to  protect  and  encourage  home  industries.  In  adopting 
the  principle  of  protection,  he  was  not  influenced,  he  asserted, 
by  the  theories  of  economists,  but  by  his  own  observation 
of  facts.  In  his  speech  of  the  2nd  of  May  1879,  in  which 
he  introduced  his  protective  policy,  he  said  that  he  did 
not  propose  to  discuss  protection  and  free  trade  in  the 
abstract.  He  observed  that  while  England  was  the  only 
nation  following  the  latter  policy,  France  and  Austria  and 
Russia  and  the  United  States  were  pronounced  adherents  of 
the  former,  and  that  it  was  too  much  to  ask  that  Germany 
should  permanently  remain  the  dupe  of  an  amiable  error. 
"  We  have  hitherto,"  he  said,  "  owing  to  our  policy  of  the 


THE  POLICY  OF  PROTECTION  311 

open  door  been  the  dumping-ground  for  the  over-production 
of  other  countries.  It  is  this,  in  my  opinion,  that  has  de- 
pressed prices  in  Germany,  that  has  prevented  the  growth 
of  our  industries,  the  development  of  our  economic  life.  Let 
us  but  close  the  door,  let  us  raise  the  somewhat  higher  barrier 
which  I  am  now  proposing,  and  see  to  it  that  at  least  we 
preserve  for  German  industry  the  same  market  which  we  are 
now  good-naturedly  allowing  foreigners  to  exploit.  .  .  . 
The  fact  is  that  our  condition  is  unsatisfactory  and,  in  my 
opinion,  is  worse  than  that  of  any  of  our  protectionist  neigh- 
bors.    If  the  dangers  of  protection  were  as  great  as  they  Its  advan- 

are  painted  by  enthusiastic  free-traders,  France  would  have  ,^^®  V^ove 

...  .^y  the 

been  a  ruined  and  impoverished  country  long  ago,  because  of  history 

the  theories  which  she  has  followed  ever  since  the  time  of  Col-  of  other 
bert.  .  .  .  For  the  abstract  teachings  of  science  in  ^^"ons. 
this  connection  I  care  not  a  straw.  I  base  my  opinion  on  ex- 
perience, the  experience  of  our  own  time.  I  see  that  protec- 
tionist countries  are  prospering,  that  free-trade  countries  are 
retrograding  and  that  great  and  powerful  England,  the 
mighty  athlete,  who,  having  hardened  her  sinews,  stepped  out 
into  the  open  market  and  said:  'Who  will  fight  me?  I  am 
ready  for  any  and  all,'  even  she  is  gradually  returning  to- 
ward protection,  and  will  in  a  few  years  adopt  it,  in  order  to 
keep  for  herself  at  least  the  English  market."  ^ 

On  another  occasion  Bismarck  pointed  out  that  England 
had  adopted  free  trade  only  after  having  given  such  ample 
protection  to  her  Industries  that  they  were  able  to  outstrip 
all  others  In  the  world.     Only  then  did  she  dare  to  issue  her 
challenge.     He    cited    the    remarkable    development    of   the 
United  States  after  "  the  most  gigantic  and  expensive  war  of 
all  history,"  as  proof  of  his  contention.     "  Because  It  Is  my 
deliberate  opinion  that  the  prosperity  of  the  United  States  Germany 
is  chiefly  due  to  her  system  of  protection,  I  urge  that  Ger-  jj^itate  the 
many  has  now  reached  the  point  where  It  Is  necessary  that  she  iTnited 
follow  her  example."  States. 

*  Kohl,  Die  politischen  Reden  des  FUrsten  Bismarck,  VIII,  11-32. 


312  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

Bismarck  won  the  day,  though  not  without  difficulty. 
Germany  entered  upon  a  period  of  protection,  wliich,  grow- 
ing higher  and  applied  to  more  and  more  industries,  has 
continued  ever  since.  Bismarck  believed  that  Germany  must 
become  rich  in  order  to  be  strong;  that  she  could  only 
become  rich  by  manufactures ;  and  that  she  could  have 
The  system  manufactures  only  by  giving  them  protection.  The  system 
gradually  ^^.^^g  worked  out  gradually  and  piecemeal,  as  he  could  not 
carry  his  whole  plan  at  once.  By  means  of  the  tariff  Bis- 
marck wished  to  assure  Germans  the  home  market.  Not 
only  has  that  been  largely  accomplished,  but  by  its  means  the 
foreign  market  also  has  been  widened.  Through  offering 
concessions  to  foreign  nations  for  concessions  from  them, 
Germany  has  gained  for  her  manufactured  products  an  en- 
trance into  many  other  countries,  which  was  denied  them 
before.  The  prodigious  expansion  of  German  industry  after 
1880  is  regarded  as  a  vindication  of  this  policy. 

BISMARCK  AND   SOCIALISM 

The  growth  In  1878  Bismarck  turned  his  attention  to  the  Socialist 
of  Socialism.  pai-|;y  which  had  for  some  time  been  growing,  and  now 
seemed  menacing.  That  party  was  founded  by  Ferdinand 
Lassalle,  a  Socialist  of  1848,  much  influenced  by  the  French 
school  of  that  day.  The  party,  originally  appearing  in  1848, 
was  shortly  broken  up  by  persecution  and  did  not  reappear 
until  1863.  In  1865  Lassalle  founded  a  journal  called  the 
Social  Democrat.  In  opposition  to  this  party  a  somewhat 
different  Socialist  group  was  led  by  Karl  Marx.  These  two 
were  rivals  until  1875,  when  a  fusion  was  effected  and  the 
party  platform  was  adopted  at  Gotha.  In  1871  the  Socialists 
elected  two  members  to  the  Reichstag,  three  years  later  their 
representation  increased  to  nine,  and  in  1877  to  twelve.  The 
Socialist  votes  polled  in  the  first  ordinary  returns  were:  in 
1871,  124,655  out  of  a  total  of  3,892,160;  1874,  351,952  out 
of  5,190,254 ;  and  1877,  493,288  out  of  5,401,021. 

The  steady  growth  of  this  party  aroused  the  alarm  of  the 


MEASURES  AGAINST  THE  SOCIALISTS     313 

ruling  classes  of  Germany,  and,  as  its  aims  were  revolutionary  Alarm  of 

the  rur 
classes. 


and  destructive  of  the  entire  existing  order,  it  was  a  more 


serious  enemy  than  the  Center  and  Ultramontane  party. 
William  I  regarded  Socialism  as  his  personal  enemy,  and 
considered  himself  commissioned  by  God  to  combat  it.  Bis- 
marck had  never  yet  proposed  any  comprehensive  programme 
against  it,  but  he  had  long  hated  the  party,  as  was  natural, 
considering  his  training  and  environment,  and  considering 
also  the  declarations  of  the  Socialists  themselves.  Their 
leaders,  Liebknccht  and  Bebel,  had  opposed  the  North  Ger- 
man Confederation,  the  war  with  France,  the  annexation  of 
Alsace  and  Lorraine.  The  Socialists  expressed  openly  and 
freely  their  entire  opposition  to  the  existing  order  in  Ger- 
many. It  was  only  a  question  of  time  when  they  must  clash 
violently  with  the  man  who  had  helped  so  powerfully  to 
create  that  order,  and  whose  life-work  henceforth  was  to 
consolidate  it.  Again,  the  Socialist  party  was  radically 
democratic,  and  Bismarck  hated  democracy.  A  conflict  be- 
tween men  representing  the  very  opposite  poles  of  opinion 
was  inevitable.  The  occasion  came  in  1878,  when  two  at-  Attempts 
tempts  were  made  upon  the  life  of  the  aged  Emperor,  the  R. 
first  on  May  11th,  and  the  second  on  June  2nd,  the  latter  Emperor, 
proving  very  serious.  These  attempts  upon  the  life  of  a 
man  who  was  their  hero  horrified  and  angered  the  people. 
The  would-be  assassins  had  acted  of  their  own  motion,  but 
they  were  Socialists.  The  Socialists  denounced  their  acts, 
nevertheless  public  opinion  held  them  responsible.  Bismarck 
determined  to  use  this  opportunity  to  crush  them  once  for 
all.  He  would  use  two  methods,  one  stern  repression  of 
Socialist  agitation,  the  other  amelioration  of  the  conditions 
of  the  working  class,  conditions  which  alone,  he  believed, 
caused  them  to  listen  to  the  false  and  deceptive  doctrines 
of  the  Socialist  leaders. 

First  came  repression.     In  October  1878  a  law  of  great  Severe 
severity,    mtended   to    stamp    out    completely    all    Socialist  against  the 
propaganda,  was   passed  by   the  Imperial  Parliament.     It  Socialists. 


314 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


Their 
failure. 


Continued 
growth 
of  the 
Socialist 
party. 


forbade  all  associations,  meetings  and  publications  having 
for  their  object  "  the  subversion  of  the  social  order,"  or  in 
which  "  socialistic  tendencies  "  should  appear.  It  gave  the 
police  large  powers  of  interference,  arrest,  and  expulsion  from 
the  country.  Martial  law  might  be  proclaimed  where  de- 
sirable, which  meant  that,  as  far  as  Socialists  were  con- 
cerned, the  ordinary  courts  would  cease  to  protect  individual 
liberties.  Practically  a  mere  decree  of  a  police  official 
sufficed  to  expel  from  Germany  any  one  suspected  or  accused 
of  being  a  Socialist.  This  law  was  enacted  for  a  period  of 
four  years.  It  was  later  twice  renewed  and  remained  in  force 
until  1890.  It  was  vigorously  applied.  According  to  statis- 
tics furnished  by  the  Socialists  themselves,  1-iOO  publica- 
tions were  suppressed,  1500  persons  were  imprisoned,  900 
banished,  during  these  twelve  years.  One  might  not  read  the 
works  of  Lassalle,  for  instance,  even  in  a  public  library. 

This  law,  says  a  biographer  of  Bismarck,  is  very  disap- 
pointing. "  We  find  the  Government  again  ha\'ing  recourse 
to  the  same  means  for  checking  and  guarding  opinion  which 
Metteniich  had  used  fifty  years  before."  ^  It  was,  moreover, 
an  egregious  failure.  For  twelve  years  the  Socialists  carried 
on  their  propaganda  in  secret.  It  became  evident  that  their 
power  lay  in  their  ideas  and  in  the  economic  conditions  of 
the  working  classes,  rather  than  in  formal  organizations, 
which  might  be  broken  up.  A  paper  was  published  for 
them  in  Switzerland  and  every  week  thousands  of  copies 
found  their  way  into  the  hands  of  workingmen  in  Germany, 
despite  the  utmost  vigilance  of  the  police.  Persecution  in 
their  case,  as  in  that  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  only  rendered 
the  party  more  resolute  and  active.  At  first  it  seemed  that 
the  law  would  realize  the  aims  of  its  sponsors,  for  in  the 
elections  of  1881,  the  first  after  its  passage,  the  Socialist 
vote  fell  from  about  493,000  to  about  312,000.  But  in 
1884  it  rose  to  549,000;  in  1887  to  763,000;  in  1890  to 
1,427,000,  resulting  in  the  election  of  thirty-five  members  to 

*  Headlam,   Bismarck,  409. 


STATE  SOCIALISM  315 

the  Reichstag.  In  that  year  the  laws  were  not  renewed. 
The  Socialists  came  out  of  their  contest  with  Bismarck 
with  a  popular  and  a  parliamentary  vote  increased  three- 
fold. 

But  Bismarck  had  at  no  time  intended  to  rest  content 
with  merely  repressive  measures.  He  had  purposed  from  the 
beginning  to  effect  such  sweeping  reforms  in  the  conditions 
of  the  working  classes  that  they  would  see  that  the  State 
was  their  true  benefactor,  and  would  rally  around  it,  leaving 
the  Socialist  party  stranded  and  with  no  further  reason  for 
existence.  In  the  very  year  1878  he  said  in  the  Reichstag, 
"  I  will  further  every  endeavor  which  positively  aims  at  im- 
proving the  condition  of  the  working  classes,"  and  he 
promised  to  consider  "  any  positive  proposal "  coming  from 
the  Socialists  "  for  fashioning  the  future  in  a  sensible  way." 
In  this  he  and  Emperor  William  I  were  in  entire  accord,  as 
they  had  not  been  in  the  Kulturkampf.  The  Emperor  in 
opening  the  Reichstag  in   1879,   said,   "  A   remedy   cannot  The 

alone  be  sought  in  the  repression  of  socialistic   agitation ;  ^"^P^"^! 
1-1  11  •  •  1  r  Govern- 

there  must  be   sunultaneously   the   positive   advancement   or  j^gn^  under- 

the  welfare  of  the  working  classes.  And  here  the  case  of  takes  social 
those  work-people  who  are  incapable  of  earning  their  own  ^^^orm. 
livelihood  is  of  the  greatest  importance."  Two  years  later 
(March  8,  1881)  he  said,  "That  the  State  should  interest 
itself  to  a  greater  degree  than  hitherto  in  those  of  its  mem- 
bers who  need  assistance,  is  not  only  a  duty  of  humanity 
and  Christianity — by  which  state  institutions  should  be 
permeated — but  a  duty  of  state-preserving  policy,  whose 
aim  should  be  to  cultivate  the  conception — and  that,  too, 
among  the  non-propertied  classes,  which  form  at  once  the 
most  numerous  and  the  least  instructed  part  of  the  popula- 
tion— that  the  State  is  not  merely  a  necessary  but  a  benev- 
olent Institution.  These,  classes  must,  by  the  evident  and 
direct  advantages  which  are  secured  to  them  by  legislative 
measures,  be  led  to  regard  the  State,  not  as  an  institution  con- 
trived for  the  protection  of  the  better  classes  of  society. 


316 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


but  as  one  serving  their  own  needs  and  interests,"  *     Bi 


is- 


Various 
forms  of 
insurance 
proposed. 


State 
Socialism. 


The 

measures 

carried. 


marck  said  in  1884 :  "  The  whole  matter  centers  in  the  ques- 
tion: Is  it  the  duty  of  the  state,  or  is  it  not,  to  provide 
for  its  helpless  citizens?  I  maintain  that  it  is  its  duty,  that 
it  is  tlie  duty  not  only  of  the  Christian  state  .  .  .  but 
of  every  state."  " 

The  method  by  which  Bismarck  proposed  to  improve  the 
condition  of  the  working  class  was  by  an  elaborate  and 
comprehensive  system  of  insurance  against  the  misfortunes 
and  vicissitudes  of  life,  against  sickness,  accident,  old  age 
and  incapacity.  It  was  his  desire  that  any  workingman 
incapacitated  in  any  of  these  ways  should  not  be  exposed 
to  the  possibility  of  becoming  a  pauper,  but  should  receive 
a  pension  from  the  state.  His  policy  was  called  State 
Socialism.  "  Give  the  workingman  the  right  to  employment 
as  long  as  he  has  health,"  he  told  the  Reichstag,  "  assure 
him  care  when  he  is  sick,  and  maintenance  when  he  is  old. 
If  you  will  do  that  without  fearing  the  sacrifice,  or  crying 
out  '  State  Socialism  '  as  soon  as  the  words  '  provision  for  old 
age '  are  uttered  .  .  .  then  I  believe  these  gentlemen 
(the  Socialists)  will  sound  their  bird  call  in  vain;  and  as 
soon  as  the  workingmen  see  that  the  Government  is  deeply 
interested  in  their  welfare,  the  flocking  to  them  will  cease." 

Bismarck's  proposals  met  with  vehement  opposition,  both  in 
the  Reichstag  and  among  influential  classes  outside.  It  was 
only  slowly  that  he  carried  them  through,  the  Sickness  In- 
surance Law  in  1883,  the  Accident  Insurance  Laws  in  1884 
and  1885,  and  the  Old  Age  Insurance  Law  in  1889.  These 
laws  are  very  complicated  and  cannot  be  described  here  at 
length. 

Bismarck  wished  to  have  the  state  bear  the  entire  expense. 
He  did  not  wish  to  have  it  come  as  an  additional  burden 
to  the  working  people.  But  he  was  not  able  to  secure  the 
consent  of  the  Reichstag,  which  gave  as  reasons  for  its  op- 

*  Dawson,  Bismarck  and  State  Socialism,  111. 
» Ibid.,  118. 


STAIE  INSURANCE  317 

position  the  enormous  umount  of  money  required,  the  great 
centralization  of  power  in  the  hands  of  the  Government  which 
would  arise  from  a  system  requiring  so  many  officials  and 
handling  such  large  sums,  and  the  weakening  of  the  sense  of 
self-reliance  and  personal  responsibility  with  the  workingmen. 

As  finally  enacted  in  the  case  of  accident  insurance  the 
employers  bear  the  burden  alone.  The  employer  is  obliged 
by  law  to  insure  his  employees,  entirely  at  his  own  expense. 
In  the  case  of  sickness  insurance,  as  a  rule,  the  employer 
must  pay  one-third  and  the  employee  two-thirds  of  the 
premium,  and  in  the  case  of  the  old  age  and  incapacity 
insurance,  the  premiums  are  paid  by  the  employers,  the 
employees,  and  to  some  extent,  by  the  state. 

Such  was  Bismarck's  contribution  to  the  solution  of  the  Bismarck 
social  question,  which  grew  to  such  commanding  importance  ^  Pio^^eer. 
as  the  nineteenth  century  wore  on.  In  this  legislation  Bis- 
marck was  a  pioneer.  His  ideas  have  been  studied  widely 
in  other  countries,  and  his  example  followed  in  some.  Daw- 
son calls  him  "  the  first  social  reformer  of  the  century." 
Bismarck,  once  charged  with  changing  his  opinions  to  meet 
the  occasion,  replied  that  he  had  frequently  changed  his 
opinions.  "  But  I  have  been  faithful  to  this :  the  unification 
of  Germany  under  the  leadership  of  Prussia.  Everything 
else  is  accessory."  That  this  system  of  state  insurance,  by 
relieving  the  mental  and  physical  distress  of  millions  of 
German  laborers  would  strengthen  the  Empire,  as  well  as 
benefit  humanity,  was,  in  his  opinion,  an  additional  reason 
for  its  adoption. 

The  Socialists  did  not  co-operate  with  him  in  the  passage  Not  sup- 
of  these  laws,  which  they  denounced  as  entirely  inadequate  P*'"^'*  "y 
to  solve  the  social  evils,  as  only  a  slight  step  in  the  right  socialists, 
direction.     Nor    did    Bismarck   wish    their   support.     They 
were   Social  Democrats.     Democracy   he  hated.     Socialism 
of  the  state,   controlled  by   a  powerful  monarch,  was   one 
•  thing.     Socialism  carried  through  by   the  people  believing 
in  a  democratic  government,  opposed  to  the  existing  order 


318  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

in  government  and  society,  a  very  different  thing.  At  the 
very  moment  that  Bismarck  secured  the  passage  of  the 
Accident  Insurance  Bill  he  also  demanded  the  renewal  of  the 
law  against  the  Socialists.  His  prophecy,  that  if  these  laws 
were  passed  the  Socialists  would  sound  their  bird  call  in  vain, 
has  not  been  fulfilled.  That  party  has  grown  greatly  and 
almost  uninterruptedly  ever  since  he  began  his  war  upon  it. 

ACQUISITION   OF   COLONIES 

^^®  One  of  the  important  features   of  the   closing  years   of 

of  a  colonial  Bismarck's  political  career  was  the  beginning  of  a  German 
empire.  colonial  empire.      In  his  earlier  years  Bismarck  did  not  be- 

lieve in  Germany's  attempting  the  acquisition  of  colonies. 
In  1871  he  refused  to  demand  as  prize  of  war  any  of  the 
French  colonial  possessions.  He  believed  that  Germany 
should  consolidate,  and  should  not  risk  incurring  the  hos- 
tility of  other  nations  by  entering  upon  the  path  of  colonial 
rivalry.  But  colonies,  nevertheless,  were  being  founded  under 
the  spirit  of  private  initiative.  Energetic  merchants  from 
Hamburg  and  Bremen  established  trading  stations  in  Africa, 
and  the  islands  of  the  Pacific,  for  the  purpose  of  selling  their 
goods  and  acquiring  tropical  products,  such  as  cocoa,  coffee, 
rubber,  spices.  The  aid  of  the  Government  was  invoked 
at  various  times,  but  Bismarck  held  aloof.  The  interest 
aroused  in  the  exploits  of  these  private  companies  gave  rise 
towards  1880  to  a  definite  colonial  party  and  the  forma- 
tion of  a  Colonial  Society,  which  has  since  become 
important. 
A  result  of  The  change  in  the  policy  of  the  Government,  however, 
from  one  of  aloofness  to  one  of  energetic  participation  and 
policy  of  acquisition  of  colonies  was  largely  a  result  of  the  adoption 
protection,  of  the  policy  of  protection  and  active  governmental  en- 
couragement of  manufactures  and  commerce.  In  the  debate 
on  the  tariff  bill  of  1879  Bismarck  said  that  it  was  desirable 
to  protect  manufactures,  that  thus  a  greater  demand  for 
labor  would  arise,  that  more  people  could  live  in  Germany, 


ACQUISITION  OF  COLONIES  319 

and    that    therefore    the    emigration    which    had    for    years 

drawn  tens  of  thousands  from  the  country,  particularly  to 

tlie   United   States,   would   be   decreased.     But   to    develop 

manufactures  to  the  utmost,  Germany  must  have  new  markets 

for  her  products ;   and  here   colonies   would   be  useful.     In 

1884<  he  adopted  a  vigorous  colonial  policy,  supporting  and 

expanding  the  work  of  the  private  merchants  and  travelers. 

In  that  year  Germany  seized  a  number  of  points  in  Africa,  in  Energetic 

the  southwest,  the  west,  and  the  east.     A  period  of  diplo-  ^.       .     " 

.  .  .         .  tion  in 

matic    activity    began,    leading    in    the    next    few    years    to  Africa. 

treaties  with  England  and  other  powers,  resulting  in  the 
fixing  of  the  boundaries  of  the  various  claimants  to  African 
territory.  This  is  the  partition  of  Africa  described  else- 
where.' Germany  thus  acquired  a  scattered  African  em- 
pix'e    of    great    size,    consisting    of    Kamerun,    Togoland,  The 

German  Southwest  Africa,  German  East  Africa ;  also  a  part     ^"^"^^^ 
.  colonies, 

of  New  Guniea.     Later  some  of  the  Samoan  islands   came 

into  her  possession,  and  in  1899  she  purchased  the  Caroline 

and  the  Ladrone  islands,  excepting  Guam,  from  Spain  for 

about  four  million  dollars. 

THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 

While  domestic  affairs  formed  the  chief  concern  of  Bis- 
marck after  the  war  with  France,  yet  he  followed  the  course 
of  foreign  affairs  with  the  same  closeness  of  attention  that 
he  had  shown  before,  and  manipulated  them  with  the  same 
display  of  subtlety  and  audacity  that  had  characterized 
his  previous  diplomatic  career.  His  great  achievement  in 
diplomacy  in  these  years  was  the  formation  of  the  Triple  The  Triple 

A^l  1 1 Q  yi  n  p 

Alliance,  an  achievement  directed,  like  all  the  actions  of 
his  career,  toward  the  consolidation  and  exaltation  of  liis 
country.  The  origin  of  this  alliance  is  really  to  be  found 
in  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort,  which  sealed  the  humiliation 
of  France.  The  wresting  from  France  of  Alsace  and  Lor- 
raine inevitably  rendered  that  country  desirous  of  a  war  of 
See   Chapter   XXIII. 


320  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

revenge,  of  a  Avar  for  their  recovery.  This  has  remained  the 
open  sore  of  Europe  since  1871.  Firmly  resolved  to  keep 
what  he  had  won,  Bismarck's  chief  consideration  was  to 
render  such  a  war  hopeless,  therefore,  perhaps,  impossible. 
Isolation  of  France  must  be  isolated  so  completely  that  she  would  not 
dare  to  move.  This  was  accomplished,  first  by  the  friendly 
understanding  brought  about  by  Bismarck  between  the  three 
rulers  of  eastern  Europe,  the  Emperors  of  Germany,  Russia, 
and  Austria.  But  this  understanding  was  shattered  by 
events  in  the  Balkan  peninsula  during  the  years  from  1876 
to  1878.  In  the  Balkans,  Russia  and  Austria  were  rivals, 
and  their  rivalry  was  thrown  into  high  relief  at  the  Congress 
of  Berlin.  Russia,  unaided,  had  carried  on  a  war  with 
Turkey,  and  had  imposed  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  upon 
her  conquered  enemy,  only  to  find  that  Europe  would  not 
recognize  that  treaty,  but  insisted  upon  its  revision  at 
an  international  congress,  and  at  that  congress  she  found 
Bismarck,  to  whom  she  had  rendered  inestimable  services 
in  the  years  so  critical  for  Prussia,  from  1863  to  1870,  now 
acting  as  the  friend  of  Austria,  a  power  which  had  taken 
no  part  in  the  conflict,  but  was  now  intent  upon  drawing 
chestnuts  from  the  fire  with  the  aid  of  the  Iron  Chancellor. 
The  Treaty  of  Berlin  was  a  humiliation  for  Russia  and  a 
striking  success  for  Austria,  her  rival,  which  was  now  em- 
powered to  "  occupy  "  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina.  No  wonder 
that  the  Russian  Chancellor,  Gortchakoff,  pronounced  the 
Congress  of  Berlin  "  the  darkest  episode  in  his  career," 
and  that  Alexander  II  declared  that  "  Bismarck  had  for- 
gotten his  promises  of  1870."  By  favoring  one  of  his 
allies  Bismarck  had  alienated  the  other.  In  this  fact 
lay  the  germ  of  the  two  great  international  combina- 
tions of  the  future,  the  Triple  and  Dual  Alliances, 
factors  of  profound  significance  in  the  recent  historj 
of  Europe. 

Of  these  the  first  in  order  of  creation  and  in  importance 
was  the  Triple  Alliance.     Realizing  that  Russia  was  mor- 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  321 

tally  offended  at  his  conduct,  and  that  the  friendly  under- 
standing with  her  was  over,  Bismarck  turned  for  compensa- 
tion to  a  closer  union  with  Austria,  and  concluded  a  treaty  Austro- 
with  her  October  7,  1879.  This  treaty  provided  that  if  ^^eaty  of 
either  Germany  or  Austria  were  attacked  by  Russia  the  i879. 
two  should  be  bound  "  to  lend  each  other  reciprocal  aid 
with  the  whole  of  their  military  power,  and,  subsequently, 
to  conclude  no  peace  except  conjointly  and  in  agreement"; 
that  if  either  Germany  or  Austria  should  be  attacked  by 
another  power — as,  for  instance,  France — the  ally  should 
remain  neutral,  but  that  if  this  enemy  should  be  aided  by 
Russia,  then  Germany  and  Austria  should  act  together  with 
their  full  military  force,  and  should  make  peace  in  common. 
Thus  this  Austro-German  Treaty  of  1879  established  a 
defensive  alliance  aimed  particularly  against  Russia,  to  a 
lesser  degree  against  France.  The  treaty  was  secret  and 
was  not  pubhshed  until   1887.     Meanwhile,  in   1882,  Italy  Entrance 

ioined  the  alliance,  irritated  at  France  because  of  her  seizure  ^ 

''  '  ^  into  the 

the  year  before  of  Tunis,  which  Italy  herself  coveted  as  a  alliance, 
seat  for  colonial  expansion.  Thus  was  formed  the  Triple 
Alliance.  The  text  of  that  alliance  has  never  been  pub- 
lished, but  its  purpose  and  character  may  be  derived  from 
that  of  the  Austro-German  alliance,  which  was  now  merely 
expanded  to  include  another  power.  The  alliance  was 
made  for  a  period  of  years,  but  has  been  constantly  re- 
newed and  is  still  in  force.  It  is  a  defensive  alliance,  de- 
signed to  assure  its  territory  to  each  of  the  contracting 
parties. 

Thus  was  created  a  combination  of  powers  which  dom- 
inated central  Europe,  from  the  Baltic  to  the  Mediterranean, 
and  which  rested  on  a  military  force  of  over  two  million 
men.  At  its  head  stood  Germany.  Europe  entered  upon  a 
period  of  German  leadership  in  international  affairs  which 
was  later  to  be  challenged  by  the  rise  of  a  new  alliance, 
that  of  Russia  and  France,  which  for  various  reasons,  how- 
ever, was  slow  in  forming. 


322  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

THE  REIGN  OF  WILLIAM  II 

Death  of  On  the  9th  of  March,  1888,  Emperor  William  I  died  at 

^^  •  the  age  of  ninety-one.  He  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Fred- 
erick HI,  in  his  fifty-seventh  year.  The  new  Emperor  was 
a  man  of  moderation,  of  liberalism  in  politics,  an  admirer 
of  the  English  constitution.  It  is  supposed  that,  had  he 
lived,  the  autocracy  of  the  ruler  would  have  given  way  to 
a  genuine  parliamentary  system  like  that  of  England,  and 
that  an  era  of  greater  liberty  would  have  been  inaugurated. 
But  he  was  already  a  dying  man,  ill  of  cancer  of  the  throat. 
His  reign  was  one  of  physical  agony  patiently  borne.  Un- 
able to  use  his  voice,  he  could  only  indicate  his  wishes  by 
writing  or  by  signs.  The  reign  was  soon  over,  before  the 
era  of  liberalism  had  time  to  dawn.  Frederick  was  King 
and  Emperor  only  from  March  9  to  June  15,  1888. 

Accession  of  He  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  William  II,  the  present 
lam  .  j^j^^pgpor.  The  new  ruler  was  twenty-nine  years  of  age,  a 
young  man  of  very  active  mind,  of  fertile  imagination,  versa- 
tile, ambitious,  self-confident,  a  man  of  unusual  promise. 
His  education  had  been  thorough  and  intelligent.  In  poli- 
tics he  was  without  experience.  In  his  earliest  utterances 
he  showed  his  enthusiasm  for  the  army  and  for  religious 
ol^:hodox3^  He  held  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  origin  of 
his  power  with  medieval  fem^or,  expressing  it  with  frequency 
and  in  dramatic  fashion.  It  was  evident  that  a  man  of 
such  a  character  would  wish  to  govern,  and  not  simply 
reign.  He  would  not  be  willing  long  to  efface  himself  be- 
hind the  imposing  figure  of  the  great  Chancellor.  Bismarck 
had  prophesied  that  the  Emperor  would  be  his  own  Chancellor, 
yet  he  did  not  have  the  wisdom  to  resign  when  the  old 
Emperor  died,  and  to  depart  with  dignity.  He  clung  to 
power.  From  the  beginning  friction  developed  between 
the  two.  They  thought  differently,  felt  differently.  The 
fundamental  question  was,  who  should  rule  in  Germany.'' 
The  struggle  was  for  supremacy  since  there  was  no  way 


RESIGNATION  OF  BISMARCK  323 

in   which   two   persons   so   self-willed   and    autocratic    could 
divide   power.     As   Bismarck   stayed   on   when   he   saw  that 
his  presence  was  no  longer  desired,  the  Emperor,  not  willing 
to   be   overshadowed   by   so    commanding   and    illustrious    a  The 
minister,   finally   demanded  his   resignation   in   1890.     Thus  I'esigna- 
in  bitterness   and  humiliation  ended  the  political  career  of  _.  , 

a  man  who,  according  to  Bismarck  himself,  had  "  cut  a  figure 
in  the  history  of  Germany  and  Prussia."  He  lived  several 
years  longer,  dying  in  1898  at  the  age  of  eighty-three, 
leaving  as  his  epitaph,  "  A  faithful  servant  of  Emperor 
William  I."  Thus  vanished  from  view  a  man  who  will  rank 
in  history  as  one  of  the  few  great  founders  of  states. 

Since  1890  the  personality  of  William  II  has  been  the 
decisive  factor  in  the  state.  His  Chancellors  have  been, 
in  fact  as  well  as  in  theory,  his  servants,  carrying  out  the 
master's  wish.  There  have  been  four:  Caprivi,  1890-1894; 
Hohenlohe,  1894-1900;  von  Biilow,  1900-1909;  and  Beth- 
mann-Hollweg  since  July,  1909. 

The  extreme  political  tension  was  at  first  somewhat  re-  '"^^  Anti- 
lieved  by  the  removal  of  Bismarck  from  the  scene.  The  j^ 
early  measures  under  the  new  regime  showed  a  liberal  tend-  abandoned 
ency.  The  Anti-Socialist  laws,  expiring  in  1890,  were  not 
renewed.  This  had  been  one  of  the  causes  of  friction  be- 
tween the  Emperor  and  the  Chancellor.  Bismarck  wished 
them  renewed,  and  their  stringency  increased.  The  Em- 
peror wished  to  try  milder  methods,  hoping  to  undermine 
the  Socialists  completely  by  further  measures  of  social  and 
economic  amelioration,  to  kill  them  with  kindness.  The 
repressive  laws  lapsing,  the  Socialists  reorganized  openly, 
and  have  conducted  an  aggressive  campaign  ever  since.  The 
Emperor,  soon  recognizing  the  futility  of  anodynes,  became 
their  bitter  enemy,  and  began  to  denounce  them  vehemently, 
but  no  new  legislation  has  been  passed  against  them,  although 
several  times  attempted. 

In  commercial  matters  William  II,  without  abandoning 
the  policy  of  protection,  has  made  many  reciprocity  treaties 


su 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


Hemarkable 
expansion 
of    German 
industry. 


Germany 
a  naval 
power. 


Continued 
growth  of 
Socialism. 


with  other  nations,  aiming  to  gain  larger  markets  for  the 
products  of  German  manufacture,  and  his  reign  has  been 
notable  for  the  remarkable  expansion  of  industry  and 
connnerce,  wliich  has  rendered  Germany  the  redoubtable 
rival  of  England  and  the  United  States.  In  colonial  and 
foreign  affairs  an  aggressive  policy  has  been  followed.  Ger- 
man colonies  as  yet  have  little  importance,  have  entailed 
great  expense  and  have  yielded  only  small  returns.  But  the 
desire  for  a  great  colonial  empire  has  become  a  settled  policy 
of  the  Government,  and  has  seized  the  popular  Imagination, 
as  was  shown  in  the  last  elections,  those  of  1907.  In  that 
year  the  Socialists  having  opposed  the  policy  of  the  Gov- 
ennnent  in  Southwest  Africa,  the  Reichstag  was  dissolved, 
with  the  result  that,  for  the  first  time  in  many  years,  they 
lost  greatly  in  the  number  of  representatives  elected  by  them 
to  the  Reichstag.  Their  numbers  fell  from  eighty-one  to 
forty-three,  but  their  popular  vote  was  larger  than  ever  by 
about  a  quarter  of  a  million. 

Connected  with  the  growing  interest  of  Germany  in  com- 
mercial and  colonial  affairs  has  gone  an  increasing  interest 
in  the  navy.  Strong  on  land  for  fifty  years,  William  II 
desires  that  Germany  shall  be  strong  on  the  sea,  that  she 
may  act  with  decision  in  any  part  of  the  world,  that  her 
diplomacy,  which  is  permeated  with  the  idea  that  nothing 
great  shall  be  done  in  world  politics  anywhere,  in  Europe, 
in  Asia,  in  Africa,  without  her  consent,  may  be  supported 
by  a  formidable  navy.  To  make  that  fleet  powerful  has 
been  a  constant  and  is  a  growing  preoccupation  of  the 
present  sovereign. 

In  the  political  world  the  rise  of  the  Social  Democratic 
party  is  the  most  important  phenomenon.  It  represents 
not  merely  a  desire  for  a  revolution  in  the  economic  sphere, 
it  also  represents  a  protest  against  the  autocratic  govern- 
ment of  the  present  ruler,  a  demand  for  radically  democratic 
institutions.  While  Gennany  has  a  Constitution  and  a 
Parliament,     the     monarch     is     vested     with     vast     power. 


THE  SOCIAL  DEMOCRATIC  PARTY         325 

Parliament    does     not     control    the     Government,     as     the 

ministers    are    not    responsible    to    it.      There    is    freedom 

of  speech  in   Parliament,   but   practically   during  most   of 

this  reign  It  has  not  existed  outside.     Hundreds  of  men  have, 

during   the   past   twenty   years,   been    imprisoned    for   such 

criticisms  of  the  Government  as  in  other  countries  are  the 

current  coin  of  discussion.    This  is  the  crime  of  lese-majeste, 

which,  as  long  as  it  exists,  prevents  a  free  political  life.    The 

growth  of  the  Social  Democratic  party  to  some  extent  rep-  The  Social 

resents  mere  liberalism,  not  adherence  to  the  economic  theory  -Democratic 

.  .        party 
of  the   Socialists.     It  Is   the  great   reform   and   opposition  numerically 

party  of  Germany.  It  has  the  largest  popular  vote  of  any  the  largest, 
party,  3,250,000,  Yet  the  Conservatives  with  less  than 
1,500,000  votes  elected  In  1907  eighty-three  members  to  the 
Reichstag  to  the  forty-three  of  the  Socialists.  The  reason 
is  this.  The  electoral  districts  have  not  been  altered  since 
they  were  originally  laid  out  in  1869-71,  though  population 
has  vastly  shifted  from  country  to  city.  The  cities  have 
grown  rapidly  since  then,  and  it  is  in  industrial  centers  that 
the  Socialists  are  strongest.  Berlin  with  a  population  in 
1871  of  600,000,  had  six  members  In  the  Reichstag. 
It  still  has  only  that  number,  though  its  population  is  over 
two  million,  and  though  it  would  be  entitled  to  twenty  mem- 
bers if  equal  electoral  districts  were  granted.  These  the 
Socialists  demand,  a  demand  which,  If  granted,  would  make 
them  the  most  powerful  party  in  the  Reichstag,  as  they  are 
in  the  popular  vote.  For  this  very  reason  the  Government 
has  thus  far  refused  the  demand.  The  extreme  opponents 
of  the  Social  Democrats  even  urge  that  universal  suffrage, 
guaranteed  by  the  Constitution,  be  abolished,  as  the  only 
way  to  crush  the  party.  To  this  extreme  the  Government 
has  not  yet  gone. 

At  the  present  time  several  questions  are  important.  One 
of  these  is  the  greatly  increased  taxation  rendered  necessary, 
owing  largely  to  the  elaborate  and  costly  naval  pro- 
gramme   which    has    been    adopted,    and    which    includes 


326 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


The 

demand  for 

electoral 

reform. 


The  demand 
for   parlia- 
mentary 
reform. 


the  building  annually,  for  several  years  to  come,  of  four 
Dreadnoughts. 

Three  other  questions  are  political;  the  question  of  the 
electoral  reform  in  Prussia;  of  the  redistribution  of  seats, 
both  in  the  Prussian  Landtag  and  the  Imperial  Reichstag; 
and  of  ministerial  responsibility. 

The  Prussian  electoral  system  is  that  of  the  thi'ee  classes 
previously  described.^  According  to  this  a  man's  voting 
power  is  determined  by  the  amount  of  his  taxes.  Voters 
are  divided  into  three  groups,  according  to  taxes  paid,  and 
each  group  has  an  equal  representation  in  the  assemblies  or 
colleges  that  choose  the  deputies  to  the  lower  house  of  the 
Prussian  legislature.  The  first  class  contains  from  three  to 
five  per  cent  of  the  voters,  the  second  from  ten  to  twelve, 
whereas  the  third  class  contains  perhaps  eighty-five  per  cent, 
yet  has  only  one-third  of  the  members  of  the  colleges.  The 
result  is,  as  has  been  said,  representation  in  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies  only  for  the  rich  and  well-to-do.  The  working 
classes  are  almost  entirely  unrepresented.  Because  of  this 
method  of  indirect  elections,  down  to  1908  the  Socialists  were 
unable  to  elect  a  single  member  to  the  Prussian  Chamber. 
With  direct  election  they  would  have  been  entitled  to  about  a 
hundred  seats. 

Again,  the  electoral  districts  for  the  Prussian  Chamber 
have  not  been  changed  since  I860.  There  are  therefore  great 
inequalities  between  them.  Thus  in  the  province  of  East 
Prussia  the  actual  number  of  inhabitants  to  each  deputy  is 
63,000,  while  in  Berlin  it  is  170,000.  The  demand  is  grow- 
ing that  many  districts  be  partially  or  wholly  disfrancliised 
or  merged  with  others,  and  that  other  districts  receive  a 
larger  representation. 

In  the  Empire  a  similar  problem  is  yearly  becoming  more 
acute.  In  1871  Germany  was  divided  into  397  constituen- 
cies for  the  Reichstag.  The  number  has  remained  the  same 
ever  since,  nor  has  a  single  district  gained  or  lost  in  represen- 

See  page  186. 


PRESENT  PROBLEMS  327 

tation.  Yet  during  that  time  the  population  of  the  Empire 
has  increased  from  about  forty-one  millions  to  over  sixty 
millions,  and  there  has  been  a  great  shifting  in  popu- 
lation from  the  country  to  the  cities.  One  of  the  divisions 
of  Berlin,  with  a  population  of  697,000,  elects  one  repre- 
sentative, whereas  the  petty  principality  of  Waldeck,  with 
a  population  of  59,000,  elects  one.  The  851,000  voters 
of  Greater  Berlin  return  eight  members ;  the  same  number  of 
voters  in  fifty  of  the  smaller  constituencies  return  forty-eight. 
A  reform  of  these  gross  inequalities  is  widely  demanded. 

Another  subject   which  has   recently   received   great   em-  The  demand 

phasis    is    that    concerning    ministerial    responsibility.     The  ^°^  mimste- 

.  TT    1  1      ii  •  "^1    respon° 

indiscretions    of  Emperor  William   II   have   made   this   one  s^^jimy^ 

of  the  burning  questions.  An  interview  with  him,  in  which 
he  spoke  with  great  freedom  of  the  strained  relations  be- 
tween Germany  and  Great  Britain,  was  published  in  the 
London  Telegraph  on  October  28,  1908.  At  once  was 
seen  a  phenomenon  not  witnessed  in  Germany  since  the 
founding  of  the  Empire.  There  was  a  violent  popular  pro- 
test against  the  irresponsible  actions  of  the  Emperor,  actions 
subject  to  no  control,  and  yet  easily  capable  of  bringing 
about  a  war.  Newspapers  of  all  shades  of  party  affiliation 
displayed  a  freedom  of  utterance  and  of  censure  unparal- 
leled in  Germany.  All  parties  in  the  Reichstag  expressed 
their  emphatic  disapproval.  The  incident  was  not  sufficient 
to  bring  about  the  introduction  of  the  system  of  the  responsi- 
bility of  the  ministers  for  all  the  acts  of  the  monarch,  and  the 
control  of  the  ministry  by  the  majority  of  the  Parliament — 
in  short,  the  parliamentary  system  in  its  essential  feature. 
But  it  will  probably  prove  to  have  brought  Germany  con- 
siderably nearer  to  that  system,  through  which  the  voters 
of  a  country  have  the  supreme  authority  in  the  state. 

The  great  industrial  expansion  of  Germany  has  created 
a  numerous  and  wealthy  bourgeoisie  and  an  immense  labor 
class.  In  other  countries  the  advent  of  the  bourgeoisie 
has  been  followed  by  liberal  and  democratic  reforms,  as  in 


328  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

France  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century.  This  class 
is  now  strong  in  Germany.  An  autocratic  government  may 
favor  its  development,  in  wliich  case  it  will  be  submissive ; 
but  if  by  indiscreet  or  wilful  acts  the  monarch  threatens  the 
material  welfare  of  a  class  powerful  by  reason  of  its  wealth 
and  intelligence,  the  instinct  of  that  class  has  been  to  seek 
to  curb  the  power  of  the  individual,  to  seize  control  of 
the  state.  And  one  of  its  strongest  weapons  has  hitherto 
been  an  appeal  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  people.  Whether 
such  a  turn  in  the  evolution  of  Germany  is  impending  only 
The  present  \}^q  future  can  show.  It  is  enough  here  merely  to  indicate 
what  appears  to  be  the  most  significant  feature  of  the 
present  situation.  Whether  the  people  will  gain  in  power, 
as  they  have  gained  in  other  countries,  or  lose  even  the  portion 
they  now  have,  remains  to  be  seen.  At  present  they  count 
for  less  politically  in  Germany  than  in  the  other  countries 
of  western  Europe. 


CHAPTER  XV 
FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

We  have  seen  that  the  Republic  was  proclaimed  by  the 
Parisians  September  4,  1870,  as  a  result  of  the  defe^tts  of  the 
Empire  in  the  Franco-German  war,  culminating  at  Sedan. 
Immediately  a  Provisional  Government  of  National  De- 
fense assumed  control.  In  all  this  there  was  no  appeal  to  the 
people  of  France,  no  ratification  by  them.  This  Govern- 
ment gave  way  in  February  1871  to  a  National  Assembly 
of  750  members,  elected  by  universal  suffrage  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  peace  with  Germany.  It  was  felt  that 
the  Provisional  Government,  not  popularly  chosen,  but  the 
creation  of  a  Parisian  insurrection,  was  not  competent  to 
settle  so  grave  a  matter,  Involving,  as  it  necessarily  would, 
the   cession   of   territory    to    the   Germans.     This    National  The 

Assembly,  which  first  met  at  Bordeaux,  showed  a  majority  of  ^^tio^a^l 

Assembly. 
Monarchists.     The   reason  was   that   as   Gambetta   and  the 

leading  Republicans  wished  to  continue  the  war,  and  as  the 
mass  of  peasants  wished  peace,  the  latter  voted  for  the  oppo- 
nents of  Gambetta,  who  were  chiefly  INIonarchists.  There  is 
no  evidence  to  show  that  in  doing  this  the  peasants  were  ex- 
pressing an  opinion  against  the  Republic  as  a  form  of  gov- 
ernment and  in  favor  of  a  Monarchy.  They  wished  the  war 
stopped,  and  took  the  most  obvious  means  to  that  end.  The 
Assembly  of  Bordeaux  made  the  peace,  ceding  Alsace  and 
Lorraine,  and  assuming  the  enormous  war  Indemnity.  But 
peace  did  not  return  to  France  as  a  result  of  the  Treaty 
of  Frankfort.  The  "  Terrible  Year,"  as  the  French  call 
it,  of  1870-71  had  more  horrors  In  store.  Civil  war  fol- 
lowed the  war  with  the  foreigners,  shorter,  but  exceeding 
it  in  ferocity,  a  war  between  the  city  of  Paris  and  the 
Government  of  France,  represented  by  the  Assembly  of  Bor- 

329 


330      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


Paris 

and  the 
Assembly 
mutually 
suspicious. 


Versailles 
declared 
the  capital. 


dcaux.  That  Assembly  had,  as  wc  have  seen,  chosen  Thiers 
as  "  chief  of  the  executive  power,"  pending  "  the  nation's 
decision  as  to  the  definitive  form  of  government."  Thus 
the  fundamental  question  was  postponed.  Thiers  was 
chosen  for  no  definite  term;  he  was  the  serv^ant  of  the  As- 
sembly to  carry  out  its  wishes,  and  might  be  dismissed  by 
it  at  any  moment. 

THE  COMMUNE 

Between  the  Government  and  the  people  of  Paris  serious 
disagreements  immediately  arose,  which  led  quickly  to  the 
war  of  the  Commune.  Paris  had  proclaimed  the  Republic. 
But  the  Republic  was  not  yet  sanctioned  by  France,  and 
existed  only  de  facto.  On  the  other  hand,  the  National 
Assembly  was  controlled  by  Monarchists,  and  it  had  post- 
poned the  detennination  of  the  permanent  institutions  of 
the  country.  Did  not  this  simply  mean  that  it  would  abolish 
the  Republic  and  proclaim  the  Monarchy,  when  it  should 
judge  the  moment  propitious.?  This  fear,  only  too  well 
justified,  that  the  Assembly  was  hostile  to  the  Republic, 
was  the  fundamental  cause  of  the  Commune.  Paris  lived 
in  daily  dread  of  this  event.  Paris  was  ardently  Republican. 
For  ten  years  under  the  Empire  it  had  been  returning  Re- 
publicans to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.  These  men  did  not 
propose  to  let  a  coup  d'etat  like  that  of  Louis  Napoleon  in 
1851  occur  again.  Various  acts  of  the  Assembly  were  well 
adapted  to  deepen  and  intensify  the  feeling  of  dread  un- 
certainty. The  Assembly  show^ed  its  distrust  of  Paris  by 
voting  in  March  1871  that  it  would  henceforth  sit  in  Ver- 
sailles. In  other  words,  a  small  and  sleepy  town,  and  one 
associated  with  the  history  of  Monarchy,  was  to  be  the 
capital  of  France  instead  of  the  great  city  which  had  sus- 
tained the  tremendous  siege  and  by  her  self-sacrifice  and 
suffering  had  done  her  best  to  hold  high  the  honor  of  the 
land.  Not  only  was  Paris  wounded  in  her  pride  by  this 
act  which  showed  such  unmistakable  suspicion   of  her,  but 


PREVALENT  ECONOMIC  DISTRESS  331 

she  suffered  also  in  her  material  interests  at  a  time  of  great 
financial  distress.  Property-owners,  merchants,  workmen 
were  affected  by  this  decision,  whicli  really  removed  the 
capital  from  Paris.  The  prosperity  of  Paris,  sadly  under- 
mined by  the  war  with  the  Germans,  now  received  an 
additional  blow  from  the  Government  of  France. 

Other  highly  imprudent  acts  of  the  Assembly  tended  in 
the  same  direction.  The  payment  of  rents,  debts,  notes 
falling  due,  had  been  suspended  during  the  siege.  The 
Parisians  wished  this  suspension  prolonged  until  business 
should  revive.  The  Assembly  refused  to  grant  this,  but 
ordered  the  payment  of  all  such  debts  to  be  made  within 
forty-eight  hours.  Tlie  result  was  that  within  four  days 
150,000  Parisians  found  themselves  exposed  to  legal  prosecu- 
tion because  of  inability  to  pay  their  debts.  This  meant  im- 
mense hardship  to  the  business  world. 

Again,  the  majority  of  workingmen  still  without  employ-  Distress 
ment  had  as  their  only  means  of  support  their  pay  as  °^  *^® 
members  of  the  National  Guard.  This  was  now  suppressed  glasses 
by  the  Assembly,  except  for  those  supplied  with  certificates 
of  poverty.  The  economic  misery  of  large  numbers  was 
thus  increased  at  the  very  time  they  needed  relief,  after 
the  harrowing  siege.  The  National  Guard  included  most 
of  the  able-bodied  male  population  of  the  city.  It  had 
defended  the  city  during  the  siege,  and  its  arms  were  left 
in  its  hands  after  the  peace.  As  soon  as  the  siege  was  raised 
the  rich  and  well-to-do  members  of  the  Guard  left  Paris 
in  large  numbers,  perhaps  150,000  of  them,  to  rejoin  their 
families  in  the  provinces  and  abroad.  The  poor  remained, 
perforce,  without  work,  and  now  in  most  instances  deprived 
of  their  franc  and  a  half  a  day — an  immense  mass  of  dis- 
contented men,  wretched,  suspicious,  armed,  and  inflamed 
by  every  rumor  that  the  Republic  was  in  danger. 

There  was  also  in  Paris  a  considerable  population  having  Revolu- 

diverse  revolutionary  tendencies — Anarchists,  Jacobins,  So-  """^^^ 

.  elements, 

cialists.     The  last  party  had  grown  under  the  reign  of  Na- 


332      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The  idea 
of  the 
commune. 


The 

National 

Guard. 


poleon  III,  and  had  a  large  following  among  the  working 
classes.  Among  the  restless,  discontented,  poverty-stricken 
masses  of  the  great  city  their  leaders  worked  with  success. 
There  arose  out  of  the  confusion  of  the  time  the  idea  of  the 
commune,  or  the  individual  unit  of  the  nation,  the  city,  or  the 
village.  It  was  held  that  in  the  future  government  of  France 
emphasis  should  be  given  to  the  commune,  that  it  should  be 
vested  with  large  powers  to  exercise  as  it  saw  fit,  that  the  role 
of  the  state  as  a  whole  should  be  circumscribed.  Looked 
at  in  one  light  this  was  the  old  idea  that  France  was  too 
highly  centralized,  local  government  too  limited,  too  much 
controlled  by  the  state.  Let  France  be  decentralized,  was 
the  cry.  Each  commune  should  be  largely  independent, 
unconti'olled  in  most  matters  by  the  central  government. 
Such  a  scheme  had  this  connection  with  the  situation  of 
the  hour:  it  would  free  the  cities,  most  of  which  were  re- 
publican, in  great  measure  from  the  control  of  the  central 
government,  which  in  the  Assembly  was  monarchical.  It 
would  also  be  of  advantage  to  the  Socialists,  who  aspired  to 
invest  the  commune  with  extensive  powers  in  order  that  they 
might  be  used  to  bring  about  in  each  unit  an  economic  and 
social  revolution.  Thus  the  radical  Republicans,  suspicious 
of  the  Assembly  and  prone  to  believe  that  the  Republic  was  in 
danger,  and  a  revolutionary  party  influenced  by  Socialists 
and  inciting  the  people  of  the  crowded  workingmen's  quar- 
ters to  revolt,  both  emphasized  the  importance  of  the 
commune. 

It  was  through  the  National  Guard  that  this  confused 
discontent  gained  expression.  The  Guard  chose  in  February 
1871  a  committee  of  sixty  to  direct  it,  and  to  prevent  any 
action  against  Paris  and  against  the  Republic  on  the  part  of 
the  National  Assembly.  It  removed  some  cannon  to  one 
of  the  strongest  points  in  the  city.  The  Government, 
believing  an  insurrection  likely,  and  not  willing  to  strengthen 
it  by  leaving  the  cannon  in  the  hands  of  the  disaffected, 
endeavored  to  seize  them  on  March  18,  1871,  but  failed. 


THE  COMMUNE  OF  PARIS  333 

The  National  Guard  protected  them ;  popular  defiance  of 
the  Government  had  begun.  The  insurrectionary  spirit 
spread  with  great  rapidity  throughout  Paris  until  it  devel- 
oped into  a  war  between  Paris  and  the  Versailles  Government. 
Two  of  the  generals  of  the  latter  were  seized  and  shot  by  the 
insurgents.  The  Government  forces  were  withdrawn  from 
Paris  by  Thiers,  and  the  city  was  left  entirely  in  the  hands 
of  the  insurgents. 

Tliis  action  of  the  national  government  left  a  free  field  The 

for  the  insurgents  in  the  city.     The  more  radical  element  ^  ^, 
*=  -^  ,  .  .    of  the 

now  secured  complete  control.  An  election  was  held  in  Paris  commune, 
on  March  26th  of  a  General  Council  of  90  members  to  serve 
as  the  government  of  the  commune.  This  government,  com- 
monly called  the  Conuimne,  organized  itself  by  appointing 
ministers  or  heads  of  various  departments.  It  adopted  the 
republican  calendar  of  the  Revolution,  and  the  red  flag  of 
the  Socialists.  This  government  consisted  of  revolutionists, 
but  the  revolutionists  differed  widely  and  bitterly  from  each 
other,  and  in  these  divisions  lay  their  weakness  and  the  cause 
of  their  ultimate  overthrow.  The  ideal  of  the  new  govern- 
ment, as  announced  to  the  people,  was  the  decentralization 
of  France.  The  central  government  should  simply  consist 
of  delegates  from  the  communes.  France  was  to  be  a  kind 
of  federation  of  these  local  units.  The  Communists  vehe- 
mently denounced  as  a  slander  that  they  were  seeking  to 
destroy  the  unity  of  France,  as  worked  out  by  the  French 
Revolution :  they  were  simply  trying  to  abolish  the  kind  of 
unity  "  imposed  on  us  up  to  this  day  by  the  Empire,  the 
Monarchy,  and  Parliamentarism,"  which  had  been  but  "  des- 
potic, unintelligent,  arbitrary,  and  onerous  centralization." 
They  wished  by  the  new  and  free  and  spontaneous  unity  of 
the  communes,  co-operating  voluntarily,  to  abolish  the  old 
system  of  "  militarism,  officialism,  exploitation,  stockjobbing, 
monopolies,  and  privileges  to  which  the  proletariat  owes  its 
servitude,  and  the  fatherland  its  misfortunes  and  its  dis- 
asters."    They  appealed  to  France  to  join  them.     "  Let  her 


SM      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The 

Commune 
and  the 
National 
Assembly 
clash. 


The 
second 
siege  of 
Paris. 


be  our  ally  in  this  conflict,  which  can  only  end  by  the  triumph 
of  the  connuunal  idea  or  the  ruin  of  Paris !  "  ^ 

This  government  and  this  ideal  did  not  succeed,  as  success 
depended  on  defeating  the  Versailles  Government;.  Troops 
were  sent  out  from  Paris  to  break  up  the  National  Assembly 
in  Versailles,  but  they  failed,  their  leaders  were  seized  and 
shot  on  the  spot.  The  Commune  in  revenge  ordered  the 
arrest  of  many  prominent  men  in  Paris,  who  were  to  be 
kept  as  "  hostages." 

To  Thiers  and  the  National  Assembly  the  whole  affair 
was  infamous.  It  imperiled  the  very  existence  of  France. 
It  was  a  bold  and  unscrupulous  attempt  of  a  single  city  to 
defy  all  France,  the  more  infamous  as  foreign  troops  were 
still  in  control  of  the  country.  For  Frenchmen  to  defy 
the  Government  of  France,  to  begin  civil  war  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  victorious  Germans,  was  bitterly  humiliating 
to  the  nation  before  all  the  world.  Some  attempts  at 
bringing  about  a  reconciliation  were  made,  but  failed. 
Thiers,  to  disarm  the  cry  that  the  Republic  was  in  danger, 
denied  that  the  Government  was  preparing  to  destroy 
the  Republic,  flatly  contradicted  the  Communist  leaders — 
"  they  are  lying  to  France  " — and  announced  that  if  any 
such  conspiracy  existed  anywhere  he  would  not  lend  liim- 
self  to  its  execution,  and  a  law  was  passed,  April  14th, 
enlarging  the  powers  of  local  governing  bodies.  But  he 
was  emphatic  that  the  unity  of  France  must  be  preserved, 
and  it  was  clear  that  the  only  way  to  do  this  was  to  put 
down  the  insurgents  of  Paris.  This  was  for  some  time 
impossible,  as  the  Assembly  had  few  troops,  and  those  were  de- 
moralized. But  with  the  return  of  soldiers  from  Switzer- 
land and  from  Germany,  an  army  of  150,000  men  was  gotten 
together.  With  this  army  a  regular  siege  of  Paris  was  be- 
gun, this  time  by  Frenchmen,  Germans  who  controlled  the 
forts  to  the  north  of  Paris  looking  on,  the  second  siege  of  the 
unhappy  city  within  a  year.     Thus  civil  war  succeeded  for- 

*  Anderson,  Constitutions   and  DocumentSj  No.  126. 


THE  OVERTHROW  OF  THE  COMMUNE      335 

eign  war,  surpassing  it  in  bitterness  and  ferocity.  It 
lasted  nearly  two  months,  from  April  2d  to  May  21st,  when 
the  Versailles  troops  forced  their  entrance  into  the  city.  Then 
followed  seven  days'  ferocious  fighting  in  the  streets  of 
Paris,  the  Communists  more  and  more  desperate  and  frenzied, 
the  Versailles  army  more  and  more  revengeful  and  sangui- 
nary.    This   was    the   "  bloody   week,"   during   which   Paris  The 

suffered  much  more  than  she  had  from  the  bombardment  of        °°^ 

week." 
the   Germans — a    week    of    fearful    destruction    of   life    and 

property.  The  horrors  of  incendiarism  Avere  added  to  those 
of  slaughter.  "  Everything,"  says  Hanotaux,  of  May  23d, 
"  was  burning ;  there  were  explosions  everywhere.  A  night 
of  terror.  The  Porte  Saint-Martin,  the  church  of  Saint-  ' 
Eustache,  the  Rue  Royale,  the  Rue  de  Rivoli,  the  Tuileries, 
the  Palais-Royal,  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  the  left  bank  from  the 
Legion  d'Honneur  to  the  Palais  de  Justice,  and  the  Police 
Office  were  immense  red  braziers,  and  above  all  rose  lofty 
blazing  columns.  From  outside,  all  the  forts  were  firing 
upon  Paris.  .  .  .  The  gunners  were  cannonading  one 
another  across  the  town,  and  above  the  town.  Shells  fell 
in  every  direction.  All  the  central  quarters  were  a  battle- 
field. It  was  a  horrible  chaos :  bodies  and  souls  in  col- 
lision over  a  crumbling  w^orld."  ^  The  Communists  shot 
their  hostages.  Finally  the  agony  was  brought  to  a  close. 
On  JMay  28th  the  last  insurgents  were  shot  down  in  the 
cemetery  of  Pere-Lachaise. 

The  revenge  taken  by  the  Government  possessed  no  quality  The  Gov- 

of  mercy.     Racked  by  the  horror  of  the  week,  infuriated  by  ^^°^^^*  ^ 

revenffe^ 
the  belief  that  the  Communists,  seeing  their  defeat  approach- 
ing, had  made  a  deliberate  attempt  to  destroy  the  city,  horror- 
stricken  at  the  murder  of  the  hostages,  of  whom  one  was 
the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  it  punished  right  and  left  summarily. 
Many  were  shot  on  the  spot.  "  The  number  of  men,"  says 
Hanotaux,  "  who  perished  in  this  horrible  fray,  without  any 
other  form  of  law,  is  estimated  at  17,000.     The  cemeteries, 

*  Hanotaux,  Contemporary  "France.  I,  215. 


336      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

the  squares,  private  or  public  gardens,  saw  trenches  opened 
in  which  nameless  corpses  were  deposited  without  register 
and  without  list,  by  thousands."  ^  Arrests  and  trials  went 
on  for  years.  Up  to  1875  over  43,000  had  been  arrested, 
over  350,000  denounced.  The  prisoners  were  judged  by 
courts-martial.  Nearly  ten  thousand  were  condemned  sum- 
marily to  various  punishments,  thousands  being  deported  to 
New  Caledonia.  It  was  not  until  1879  that  an  amnesty  was 
passed  for  the  remaining  prisoners,  and  then  only  owing  to 
the  impassioned  plea  of  Gambetta  for  pity.  The  result  of 
all  this  was  the  deep  embitterment  of  classes  against  each 
other.  The  revolutionary  party,  crushed  and  silenced,  nour- 
ished its  hatred  of  the  bourgeoisie,  who  returned  its  hatred. 

THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  THIERS 

France  at  Having  put  down  the   insurrection   of  Paris   and  signed 

the  hard  treaty  with  Germany,  France  was  at  peace.  She 
had  between  July  1870  and  June  1871  received  such  stag- 
gering" blows  that  she  had  sunk  rapidly  from  the  position 
of  the  first  power  on  the  Continent  to  the  rank  of  fourth 
or  fifth.  Immense  destruction  of  national  wealth  and  na- 
tional prestige  had  characterized  the  Terrible  Year.  Time 
was  needed  for  reorganization.  France,  overwhelmingly 
crushed,  must  be  built  up  anew.  This  work  of  reconstruc- 
The  tion    was    immediately    undertaken   by    the    Government    of 

government  Thiers,  That  Grovernment  lasted  over  two  years,  and  its 
^  ^^^^'  achievements  were  notable.  Thiers  had  been  chosen  by 
the  Assembly  of  Bordeaux  "  chief  of  the  executive."  The 
Assembly  was  the  only  authority  in  France  for  several 
years.  It  had  been  elected  Febmary  8,  1871,  but  no 
definite  powers  had  been  vested  in  it,  nor  had  the  length  of 
its  term  been  fixed.  Would  this  Assembly,  which  had  been 
elected  to  decide  the  question  of  peace  and  war,  consider 
itself  competent  to  sit  longer,  to  detemiine  the  future  gov- 
ernment of  France,  and  if  so,  to  decide  that  the  government 
*  Hanotaux,  Ibid.,  225. 


\ 


THE  RIVET  LAW 

should  be  a  Monarchy,  and  not  the  Republic  proclaimed  by 
the  crowd  of  Paris  on  September  4th?  These  were  vital 
questions,  which  were,  however,  but  slowly  answered.  The 
Assembly  remained  in  power  for  nearly  five  years,  from 
February  1871  to  December  31,  1875,  refusing  to  dissolve. 

On  August  31,  1871,  it  passed  the  important  Rivet  law,  The 
by  which  it  accepted  provisionally  the  existing  government,  ^^^  ^^' 
declared  that  the  chief  of  the  executive  should  take  the 
title  of  President  of  the  French  Republic,  and  that  he  should 
be  responsible  to  the  Assembly.  The  law  also  proclaimed 
that  the  Assembly  possessed  constituent  powers,  and  was 
under  the  obligation  to  exercise  them  at  the  proper  time. 
No  definite  term  was  established  for  the  presidency.  It 
was  to  last,  so  the  Rivet  law  itself  stated,  as  long  as  the 
Assembly  lasted.  The  government,  therefore,  was  one 
strictly  by  parliament.  All  sovereignty  was  declared  vested 
in  the  Assembly.  Thiers  was  really  simply  leader  of  the 
majority.  As  soon  as  he  lost  his  majority  he  stepped 
down  and  out  (1873). 

But  before  that  time  came  he  accomplished  an  extraor- 
dinary work.  Urging  the  parties  to  drop  their  merely 
partisan  interests  for  the  time  being,  he  appealed  to  their 
patriotism,  which  was  not  lacking.  France  must  be  re- 
organized, the  wounds  of  the  past  year  healed.  After  that, 
let  the  question  of  the  final  form  of  government  be  brought 
forward. 

The  financial  burdens  created  by  the  war,  the  Commune,  ^^®  ^°^* 
and  the  loss  of  Alsace-Lorraine,  were  found,  on  examination,  „  terrible 
to  amount  to  over  fifteen  billion  francs,  or  about  three  bil-  Year." 
lion  dollars.      The  loss  in  life  was  great.      It  is  estimated 
that   about   140,000  men  were  killed,  and  more  than   that 
number  wounded;  that  about  340,000  entered  hospitals  for 
various  diseases.      France  lost  about  1,600,000  inhabitants 
by  the  cession  of  Alsace-Lorraine,  and  apart  from  that,  her 
population  suffered  a  loss  of  about  a  half  a  million. 

The   most   imperative  task   confronting  the   Government 


338      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The 

liberation 
of  the 
territory. 


was  to  get  the  Germans  out  of  the  country.  By  the  Treaty 
of  Frankfort  France  was  to  pay  within  three  years  a  war 
indemnity  of  five  billion  francs.  Until  this  was  accom- 
plished there  was  to  be  a  Gemian  army  of  occupation  in 
France,  supported  by  France,  and  occupying  a  certain 
number  of  departments.  This  army  was  to  be  withdrawn 
gradually,  as  the  instalments  of  the  indemnity  were  paid. 
The  army  at  first  numbered  about  500,000  men  and  150,000 
horses.     The  cost  of  their  support  was  heavy. 

Thiers  wished  to  bring  about  evacuation  with  the  utmost 
possible  speed,  in  order  to  remove  the  humiliation  of  a  vic- 
torious foreign  soldiery  in  France,  the  possibility  that  their 
presence  might  at  any  rioment  provoke  some  incident  Avhich 
would  lead  to  a  new  war,  and  also  to  save  millions.  Under 
his  leadership  the  task  of  paying  the  Germans  was  under- 
taken with  energy  and  carried  out  with  celerity.  The  first 
five  hundred  million  francs  were  paid  in  July  1871,  and  the 
German  troops  were  withdrawn  from  Normandy.  By  the  end 
of  September  1871  1,500,000,000  had  been  paid,  and  troops 
had  been  w  ithdrawn  from  all  but  twelve  departments.  By  the 
end  of  1871  the  army  of  occupation  numbered  150,000  men 
and  18,000  horses.  Payments  proceeded  rapidly.  In  Sep- 
tember 1873  the  final  instalment  was  met,  and  the  last  Ger- 
man soldiers  left  France.  Thus  French  soil  was  freed  nearly 
six  months  earlier  than  was  provided  by  the  treaty.  This 
rapid  liquidation  of  the  indemnity  had  been  effected  by  two 
successful  loans  contracted  by  the  Government,  one  in  1871 
for  over  2,000,000,000  francs,  the  other  in  1872  for  nearly 
3,500,000,000  francs.  The  former  was  oversubscribed  two 
and  a  half  times ;  the  latter  over  fourteen  times.  This  amaz- 
ing success  bore  striking  evidence  to  the  wealth  of  the  country. 
For  his  great  services  in  this  initial  work  of  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  France  the  National  Assembly  voted  that  Thiers 
had  "  deserved  well  of  the  country."  That  the  country 
shared  the  sentiment  was  shown  by  its  spontaneous  bestowal 
of  the  grateful  name,  "  The  Liberator  of  the  Territory." 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  THIERS  339 

The  two  years  of  Thiers'  presidency  were  notable  for  the 
energy  and  success  of  the  work  of  rebuilding  France.  Two 
measures  in  particular  merit  description,  the  local  govern- 
ment bill,  and  the  bill  whereby  the  army  was  reconstructed 
and  put  on  a  far  larger  and  sounder  basis  than  ever 
before. 

Local  government  was  partially  reorganized  in  the  direc-  Heform 

tion  of  decentralization.      Some  of  the  powers  hitherto  be-  ^^  ^°°^^ 

.  1   •       1     government, 

longmg  to  tlie  central  government  were  now  vested  m  the 

departmental  and  communal  councils.  Hitherto  the  prefect, 
head  of  the  department,  and  appointed  by  the  central  gov- 
ernment, had  had  almost  unlimited  powers  throughout  his 
department.  Ever  since  the  Revolution  various  attempts 
had  been  made  to  reduce  this  excessive  concentration  of  power 
in  the  hands  of  the  officials  in  Paris.  The  outbreak  of  the 
Commune  had  made  this  question  acute.  A  law  was  passed 
in  1871  permitting  all  adult  men  of  a  year's  residence  in 
the  commune  to  elect  the  communal  council,  and  in  the  smaller 
communes  permitting  the  council  to  choose  the  mayor.  In  all 
towns  of  over  20,000  inhabitants,  and  in  the  chief  towns  of 
departments  or  arrondissements,  the  mayors  were  still  to  be 
appointed  by  the  central  government.  The  measure  was 
a  compromise  between  Napoleonic  centralization  and  the 
complete  self-government  demanded  by  radical  reformers. 
In  only  460  communes  would  the  mayors  henceforth  be 
appointed  from  Paris. 

The  reconstruction  of  the  army  was  also  urgent.  A  Army 
law  was  passed  in  July  1872  which,  in  its  essential  features, 
still  remains  the  basis  of  the  military  system  of  France. 
The  example  of  Prussia,  so  successful,  was  followed.  Hence- 
forth there  was  to  be  universal  compulsory  military  service. 
The  National  Guard  was  abolished.  The  new  army,  based 
on  universal  obligatory  service,  was  to  be  divided  into  four 
parts,  with  various  terms :  five  years  in  the  active  army,  and 
different  periods  in  the  various  reserves.  Certain  special 
classes  were  to  be  required  to  give  only  one  year's  service, 


34.0   FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The 

question 
of  the 
permanent 
form  of 
government. 


Thiers 
and  the 
Republic. 


as  for  instance,  young  men  who  showed  certain  certificates 
of  advanced  education.  These  must,  liowever,  pay  to  the 
state  the  amount  of  1500  francs.  Other  classes  were  ex- 
empted entirely  from  service — ecclesiastics,  teachers,  and 
sons  of  widows,  supposed  to  be  supporters  of  families. 
The  enactment  of  this  law,  with  the  principle  of  compulsory 
service  for  five  years  in  the  active  army,  was  one  of  the 
most  important  acts  of  the  early  years  of  the  Tliird  Re- 
public. In  the  face  of  the  threats  from  Germany,  alarmed 
at  this  revival  of  French  military  power,  France  went 
steadily  ahead  with  her  projects  of  reorganization.  Not 
only  was  a  new  and  large  army  provided,  but  fortresses 
were  built,  equipment  created,  all  burdensome,  yet  willingly 
borne. 

In  regard  to  the  subjects  which  grew  out  of  the  war,  the 
terms  of  peace,  and  the  necessary  measures  of  reconstruction, 
the  Assembly  was  able  to  work  on  the  whole  harmoniously. 
But  now  a  question,  which  could  no  longer  be  postponed, 
and  wliich  was  highly  divisive  in  its  nature,  entered  upon 
its  acute  phase — the  question  of  the  permanent  form  of 
government.  The  Republic  existed  de  facto,  but  not  in  law. 
It  had  been  merely  proclaimed  by  an  insurrectionary  body 
in  Paris  in  September  1870.  The  Assembly,  which  was 
elected  in  the  following  February,  and  which  represented 
all  France,  proved  to  be  composed,  as  we  have  seen,  in 
the  majority,  of  Monarchists.  Would  these  Monarchists 
consider  that  they  were  elected  to  make  a  constitution, 
not  simply  to  determine  the  question  of  peace  and  war? 
If  so,  would  they  not  simply  declare  the  restoration  of 
the  Monarchy .?  They  did  not  at  first  attempt  this,  probably 
because  they  preferred  that  the  odium  of  a  peace  relinquish* 
ing  French  territory  should  attach  to  the  Republic,  not  to 
the  restored  Monarchy.  But  now  that  the  peace  was  made, 
the  territory  freed,  the  necessary  laws  passed,  the  Monar- 
chists became  active.  They  found  they  had  in  Thiers  a 
man  who  would  not  abet  them  in  their  project.      Thiers 


THIERS  AND  THE  MONARCHISTS  341 

was  originally  a  believer  in  constitutional  monarchy,  but 
he  was  not  afraid  of  a  republican  government,  and  during 
the  years  after  1870  he  came  to  believe  that  a  Republic 
was,  for  France,  at  the  close  of  a  turbulent  century,  the 
only  possible  form  of  government.  "  There  is,"  he  said, 
"  only  one  throne,  and  there  are  three  claimants  for  a 
seat  on  it."  He  discovered  a  happy  formula  in  favor  of 
the  Republic,  "  It  is  the  form  of  government  which  divides 
us  least."  And  again,  "  Those  parties  who  want  a  mon- 
archy, do  not  want  the  same  monarchy."  By  which  phrases 
he  accurately  described  a  curious  situation.  The  Monarch-  The 
ists,  while  they  constituted  a  majority  of  the  Assembly,  Monarchist 
were  divided  into  three  parties,  no  one  of  which  was  in 
the  majority.  There  were  Legitimists,  Orleanists,  and 
Bonapartists.  The  Legitimists  upheld  the  right  of  the 
grandson  of  Charles  X,  the  Count  of  Chambord ;  the  Or- 
leanists, the  right  of  the  grandson  of  Louis  Philippe,  the 
Count  of  Paris ;  the  Bonapartists,  of  Napoleon  III,  or  liis 
son.  The  Monarchist  parties  could  unite  to  prevent  a  definite, 
explicit  establishment  of  the  Republic ;  they  could  not  unite 
to  establish  the  monarchy,  as  each  wing  wished  a  different 
monarch.  Out  of  this  division  arose  the  only  chance  the 
Third  Republic  had  to  live.  As  the  months  went  by,  the 
Monarchists  felt  that  Thiers  was  becoming  constantly  more 
of  a  Republican,  which  was  true ;  not  a  Republican  of  affec- 
tion, but  one  of  reason.  He  was,  therefore,  too  dangerous 
a  man  to  leave  in  power,  as  he  might,  so  great  was  the 
authority  of  his  name  and  argument,  persuade  the  former 
Monarchists  to  become  Republicans.  Indeed,  it  has  been 
estimated  that  probably  about  a  hundred  members  of  the 
Assembly  were  influenced  by  him  in  that  direction.  If  a 
monarchical  restoration  was  to  be  attempted,  therefore, 
Thiers  must  be  gotten  out  of  the  way.  But  he  had  thus  far 
been  indispensable.  Now,  however,  that  peace  was  made,  . 
the  finances  regulated,  the  army  reorganized,  he  was  con-  ^j^j^  ^^ 
sidered  no  longer  necessary,  and  in   1873  was   outvoted  in  Thiers. 


Count  of 
Chambord 


342      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

the  Assembly,  and  resigned,  and  Marshal  MacMahon  was 
chosen  president  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  coming  monarch. 

THE  FRAMING  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION 

Earnest  attempts  were  made  forthwith  to  bring  about 
a  restoration  of  the  monarchy.  This  could  be  done  by  a 
fusion  of  the  Legitimists  and  the  Orleanists.  Circumstances 
were  particularly  favorable  for  the  accomplishment  of  such 
The  a  union.     The  Count  of  Chambord  had  no  direct  descendants. 

The  inheritance  would,  therefore,  upon  his  death,  pass  to  the 
House  of  Orleans,  represented  by  the  Count  of  Paris.  The 
elder  branch  would  in  the  course  of  nature  be  succeeded  by 
the  younger.  This  fusion  seemed  accomplished  when  the 
Count  of  Paris  visited  the  Count  of  Chambord,  recogniz- 
ing him  as  head  of  the  family.  A  committee  of  nine  members 
of  the  Assembly,  representing  the  Monarchist  parties,  the 
Imperialists  holding  aloof,  negotiated  during  the  summer  of 
1873  with  the  "  King  "  concerning  the  terms  of  restoration. 
The  negotiations  were  successful  on  most  points,  and  it 
seemed  as  if  by  the  close  of  the  year  the  existence  of  the 
Republic  would  be  terminated  and  Henry  V  would  be  reigning 
in  France.  The  Republic  was  saved  by  the  devotion  of  the 
Count  of  Chambord  to  a  symbol.  He  stated  that  he  would 
never  renounce  the  ancient  Bourbon  banner.  "  Henry  V 
could  never  abandon  the  white  flag  of  Henry  IV,"  he  had 
already  declared,  and  from  that  resolution  he  never  swerved. 
The  tricolor  represented  the  Revolution.  If  he  was  to  be 
King  of  France  it  must  be  with  his  principles  and  his  flag; 
King  of  the  Revolution  he  would  never  consent  to  be.  The 
Orleanists,  on  the  other  hand,  adhered  to  the  tricolor,  knowing 
its  popularity  with  the  people,  knowing  that  no  regime  that 
repudiated  the  glorious  symbol  could  long  endure.  Against 
this  barrier  the  attempted  fusion  of  the  two  branches  of 
the  Bourbon  family  was  shattered.  The  immediate  danger  to 
the  Republic  was  over. 

But  the  Monarchists  did  not  renounce  their  hope  of  re- 


ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  SEPTENNATE       343 

storing  the  monarchy.  The  Count  of  Chambord  might,  per- 
haps, change  his  mind:  if  not,  as  he  had  no  son,  the  Count 
of  Paris  would  succeed  him  after  his  death  as  the  lawful 
claimant  to  the  throne ;  and  the  Count  of  Paris,  defender 
of  the  tricolor,  could  then  be  proclaimed.  The  Monarchists, 
therefore,  planned  merely  to  gain  time.  Marshal  Mac- 
Mahon  had  been  chosen  executive,  as  had  Thiers,  for  no 
definite  term.  He  was  to  serve  during  the  pleasure  of 
the  Assembly  itself.  Believing  that  MacMahon  would  re- 
sign as  soon  as  the  King  really  appeared,  they  voted  that 
his  term  should  be  for  seven  years,  expecting  that  a  period  Establish- 

of  that  length  would  see  a  clearing  up  of  the  situation,  either  "^^"*  °^  *^® 
^  .  t,     f  Septennate. 

the  change  of  mind  or  the  deatli  of  the  Count  of  Chambord. 

Thus  was  established  the  Septennate,  or  seven  year  term, 
of  the  president,  which  still  exists.  The  presidency  was 
thus  given  a  fixed  term  by  the  Monarchists,  as  they  sup- 
posed, in  their  own  interests.  If  they  could  not  restore 
the  monarchy  in  1873,  they  could  at  least  control  the  presi- 
dency for  a  considerable  period,  and  thus  prepare  an  easy 
transition  to  the  new  system  at  the  opportune  moment. 

But  France  showed  unmistakably  that  she  desired  the 
establishment  of  a  definitive  system,  that  she  wished  to  be 
through  with  these  provisional  arrangements,  which  only 
kept  party  feeling  feverish  and  handicapped  France  in  her 
foreign  relations.  France  had  as  yet  no  constitution,  and  yet 
this  Assembly,  chosen  to  make  peace,  had  asserted  that  it 
was  also  chosen  to  frame  a  constitution,  and  it  was  by 
this  assertion  that  it  justified  its  continuance  in  power  long 
after  peace  was  made.      Yet  month  after  month,  and  year  Assembly 

after  year,  went  by  and  the  constitution  was  not  made,  nor  ^^  ^^  ^"* 

.  .  to  frame  a 

even   seriously   discussed.       If  the   Assembly   could  not,   or  constit^. 

would  not,  make  a  constitution,  it  should  relinquish  its  power  tion. 
and  let  the  people  elect  a  body  that  would.      But  this  it 
steadily  refused  to  do. 

There  was  a  dispute  even  as  to  what  the  form  of  govern- 
ment was  at  that  moment.     Was  it  a  Republic  or  not.''     It 


844.      FIL\NCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The 

Assembly 
active 
against 
Repub- 
licans. 


Growth 
of  the 
Hepublican 
party. 


is  true  tliat  the  Assembly  had  elected  a  President  of  the 
Republic.  It  had  thus  inferentially  ratified  the  proclamation 
of  the  Parisians  of  September  4,  1870.  But  was  this  merely 
provisional?  The  Republic  needed  to  be  founded  on  funda- 
mental laws  before  it  could  really  be  considered  established. 
But  not  only  would  the  Assembly  not  frankly  proclaim 
the  Republic,  even  after  the  attempt  to  restore  "  Henry  V  " 
had  failed,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  endeavored  to  stamp  out 
the  Republican  propaganda,  which  was  steadily  gaining 
ground  among  the  people  under  the  inspiring  leadership  of 
Gambetta.  In  order  to  increase  its  power  in  this  contest  with 
the  Republicans,  the  Assembly  altered  the  local  government 
laws  described  above.  By  the  law  of  1873  the  mayors  of  all 
the  communes  in  France  were  to  be  appointed  directly  or 
indirectly  by  the  ministry,  and  not  elected  by  the  local 
council,  as  by  the  law  of  1871.  This  gave  the  ministry 
control  of  a  number  of  office-holders  in  each  town,  who  must 
do  its  bidding.  Busts  representing  the  Republic  were  re- 
moved from  all  public  buildings ;  the  name  Republic  was 
ostentatiously  omitted  from  public  documents.  Republican 
newspapers  were  prosecuted  and  harassed  in  many  wa3'S. 
In  a  year  more  than  200  of  them  were  arbitrarily  suppressed. 
Such  conduct  rendered  the  Republicans  more  united  and 
resolute.  Gambetta  journeyed  from  town  to  town,  winning 
over  to  the  Republic  by  his  remarkable  eloquence  and  powers 
of  argumentation  "  new  social  classes,"  now  influential  by 
reason  of  universal  suffrage,  the  lower  ranks  of  the  bour- 
geoisie, and  the  working  class.  The  party  grew  steadily. 
Every  day,  therefor?,  the  Assembly  could  less  safely  appeal 
to  the  people  by  a  dissolution,  yet  with  the  rising  tide  of 
disaffection  it  must  appeal  to  it  or  must  set  about  giving 
the  country  permanent  institutions,  as  a  method  of  restoring 
quiet.  Just  at  this  time,  when  feeling  ran  so  high,  the 
Bonapartist  party  became  aggressive,  and  won  a  number 
of  successes  at  elections.  The  danger  of  a  Bonapartist 
revival  was  one  of  the  causes  which  prompted  the  Assembly 


THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  LAWS  OF  1875      345 

finally  to  take  up  seriously  the  consideration  of  the  con- 
stitution. Would  not  the  people  rush  to  the  support  of 
the  Bonapartists  when  they  saw  that  the  Assembly  could 
not  establish  the  Monarchy,  and  would  not  establish  the 
Republic?  A  number  of  Orleanist  members  preferred  even 
a  republic  to  another  Napoleonic  empire,  and  it  was  through 
their  secession  that  the  majority  shifted  in  the  Assembly  to 
the  Republicans.  Only,  they  insisted  on  making  the  Re- 
public as  conservative  as  possible,  with  as  many  of  the  at- 
tributes of  monarchy  as  could  be  thrown  about  it.  As 
the  Republicans  needed  the  votes  of  these  Orleanists  in  order 
to  carry  through  their  plans  at  all,  they  were  forced  to  make 
liberal  concessions  in  this  direction. 

Out  of  this   confused   and   abnormal   situation   arose  the  The  Con- 
laws  known  as  the  Constitution  of  1875 ;  a  law  on  the  Organ-  stitiition 

.       .  of  1875. 

ization  of  the  Senate  (February  24)  ;  on  the  Organization  of 

the  Public  Powers  (February  25)  ;  and  on  the  Relations  of 
the  Public  Powers  (July  16)  ;  and  other  organic  laws  passed 
later.  At  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  it  was  found  that 
the  word  "  republic  "  was  avoided  in  the  texts.  Proposed  in 
the  form  of  an  amendment,  it  was  voted  dowTi.  Only  later, 
and  by  indirection,  was  it  adopted  in  speaking  of  the  mode 
of  election  of  "  the  President  of  the  Republic."  Even  this 
phrase,  the  famous  Wallon  amendment,  was  adopted  by  a 
majority  of  only  one  vote,  353  to  352.  Throughout  the 
constitution  it  is  only  in  connection  with  the  presidential 
title  that  the  word  occurs.  There  is  no  formal  but  only  this 
implicit  statement  that  France  is  a  republic.  The  difficult 
word  was  officially  uttered  by  an  Assembly  that  would  have 
established  monarchy  if  it  could  have.^ 

By  the  laws  of  1875  a  legislature  consisting  of  two  houses 
was  established,  a  Senate  and  a  Chamber  of  Deputies.     The 
Senate  was  to  consist  of  300  members,  at  least  forty  years  The 
of   age.       The    Monarchists    wished    to    have   the    members  Senate. 

^  A  constitutional  amendment  adopted  in  1884  renders  the  matter  ex- 
plicit :  "  The  republican  form  of  government  shall  not  be  made  the  sub- 
ject of  a  proposed  revision." 


The 
President. 


346      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

appointed  by  the  President.  It  was  finally  determined,  how- 
ever, that  one-fourth,  or  75,  should  be  elected  for  life  by 
the  Assembly  itself,  the  remainder  for  a  term  of  nine  years. 
The  Republicans  wished  to  have  these  senators  chosen  by 
direct  universal  suffrage,  but  the  Assembly  wished  to  hmit 
the  sphere  of  universal  suffrage  as  much  as  possible.  It 
was  finally  decided  that  the  senators  of  each  department 
should  be  chosen  by  an  electoral  college.  This  electoral 
college  should  consist  of  various  classes,  the  deputies  from 
that  department,  members  of  the  general  department  coun- 
cil, members  of  the  arrondissement  or  district  councils,  and, 
more  important  than  all  the  others  because  more  numerous, 
of  one  delegate  from  each  commune  of  the  department,  chosen 
by  the  communal  council.  The  Monarchists  insisted  on 
this  arrangement  as  likely  to  give  them  control  of  the 
Senate.  No  distinction  was  made  between  communes.  A  large 
city  and  a  small  country  village  were  each  to  send  one  delegate 
to  the  college  which  should  choose  the  senator.  As  the  repre- 
sentatives from  the  country  communes  or  villages  were  the 
more  numerous  class,  and  as  the  Monarchists,  being  large 
landed  proprietors,  had  great  influence  in  the  rural  districts, 
it  was  likely  that  the  Senate  could  thus  be  controlled  by  them. 
One-third  of  the  Senate  was  to  be  renewed  every  three  years. 
There  was  also  to  be  a  Chamber  of  Deputies,  elected  by 
universal  suffrage  for  a  four-year  term.  The  Senate  and 
Chamber  of  Deputies,  meeting  together,  should  constitute  a 
National  Assembly.  Organized  in  this  form  they  should  have 
the  power  to  elect  the  President  and  to  revise  the  Constitu- 
tion. The  President  is  chosen  for  seven  years,  and  may  be  re- 
elected. There  is  no  vice-president,  no  succession  provided 
by  law.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  presidency  the  Na- 
tional Assembly  meets  and  elects  a  new  President,  generally 
within  forty-eight  hours.  The  President  has  the.  right  to 
initiate  legislation,  as  have  the  members  of  the  two  cham- 
bers, the  duty  to  promulgate  laws  after  their  passage,  to 
superintend  their  execution,  the  pardoning  power,  the  direc- 


FRANCE  A  PARLIAMENTARY  REPUBLIC  347 

tion  of  the  army  and  navy,  and  the  appointment  to  all  civil 
and  military  positions.  He  may,  with  the  consent  of  the 
Senate,  dissolve  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  before  the  expira- 
tion of  its  legal  term  and  order  a  new  election.  But  these 
powers  are  merely  nominal,  for  the  reason  that  every  act  of 
the  President  must  be  countersigned  by  a  minister,  who 
thereby  becomes  responsible  for  the  act,  the  President  being 
irresponsible,  except  in  the  case  of  high  treason.^ 

The  most  fundamental  feature  of  the  French  Republic, 
as  established  by  the  laws  of  1875,  is  the  parliamentary 
system,  as  worked  out  in  England.  "  The  ministers  are 
jointly  and  severally  responsible  to  the  Chambers  for  the 
general  policy  of  the  government,  and  individually  for  their 
personal  acts,"  says  the  law.  The  ministry,  therefore,  is  The 
the  real  executive,  and  it  is  practically  a  committee  of  ^^^^^^stry. 
the  Chambers,  chosen  to  exercise  the  executive  power  under 
the  nominal  direction  of  the  President.  The  ministry  must 
resign  as  soon  as  it  loses  support  of  the  Chambers.  The 
Chambers,  therefore,  possess  control  of  the  executive,  as 
of  the  legislative  power.  These  powers,  instead  of  being 
carefully  separated,  as  in  our  constitution,  are  really  fused, 
as  in  the  English  system.  Parliament  is  the  center  and 
head  of  power.  The  President's  position  resembles  that 
of  the  constitutional  monarch ;  one  of  ceremonial  representa- 
tion of  the  state,  without  real  power,  other  than  that  which 
may  flow  from  his  personality,  his  powers  of  suggestion 
or  advice,  which  the  ministers  may  listen  to  or  not.  The 
ministers  are  responsible  to  parliament,  that  is,  practically 
to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  as  the  popular  chamber.  It 
is  the  Chamber  that  really  makes  and  unmakes  ministries 
by  its  votes,  that  is,  controls  the  executive  branch  of  the 
government.  The  Chamber  has  proved  able  even  to  force 
the  President  to  resign  before  the  expiration  of  his  seven- 

*  These  laws  are  given  in  Anderson,  Constitutions  and  Documents, 
No.  133;  also  in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions,  I,  286-294;  in  French  in 
Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties,  II,  337-344. 


348      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


France 
parlia- 
mentary 
republic. 


Dissolution 
of  the 
National 
Assembly. 


3'ear  term  by  refusing  to  support  any  ministry,  thus  bring- 
ing all  state  action  to  a  standstill.  France  has  a  con- 
stitution more  democratic  than  that  of  England  or  the 
United  States,  in  both  of  which  countries  the  popularly 
elected  chamber  encounters  serious  checks. 

Not  tliat  this  was  apparent  to  the  Assembly  that  created 
this  system.  Not  for  some  years  was  it  clear  that  the 
democratic  element  of  this  constitution  was  to  be  the  vital 
part.  The  monarchical  assembly  that  established  the  par- 
liamentary republic  in  1875  thought  that  it  had  introduced 
sufficient  monarchical  elements  into  it  to  curb  the  aggres- 
siveness of  democracy  and  to  facilitate  a  restoration  of  the 
Monarchy  at  some  convenient  season.  By  reducing  the 
presidency  to  a  nominal  position  it  aimed  to  prevent  one- 
man  power,  the  emergence  of  a  Bonaparte,  as  in  1848  and 
1851.  The  Senate,  it  thought,  would  be  a  monarchical 
stronghold.  And  the  President  and  Senate  could  probably 
keep  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  in  check  by  their  power  of 
dissolving  it.  The  Republicans  accepted  this  system  as 
better  than  monarchy  or  the  existing  provisional  scheme. 
It  bore  the  name  Republic,  and  they  hoped  to  make  it  a 
Republic  in  more  than  name.  Some  Radical  Republicans, 
however,  denounced  tlie  Constitution  as  a  mockery. 

The  Constitution  of  1875  was  plainly  a  compromise  be- 
tween opposing  forces,  neither  of  which  could  win  an  un- 
alloyed victory.  It  was  as  Hanotaux  says,  "  a  dose  prepared 
for  a  convalescent  country." 

Having  completed  the  Constitutional  Laws,  the  National 
Assembly  which  had  been  in  session  since  February  1871, 
which  had  ratified  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort,  had  liberated 
the  territory,  and  had  reorganized  the  anny  and  local  gov- 
ernment, dissolved  itself  December  31,  1875.  The  elections 
to  the  Senate  and  Chamber  of  Deputies  were  held  at  the 
beginning  of  1876.  The  Monarchists  secured  a  slight  ma- 
jority in  the  former,  the  Republicans  a  large  majority  in  the 
latter.     MacMahon  at  first  appointed  a  ministry  of  Repub- 


THE  REPUBLIC  AND  THE  CHURCH    349 

licans,  insisting,  however,  that  three  departments  were  outside 
politics,  therefore  not  controllable  by  Parliament — the  de- 
partments of  War,  Navy,  and  Foreign  Affairs. 

The  Monarchists  now  began  a  vigorous  agitation  against  The 
the  Republicans.  They  were  powerfully  supported  by  the  ®J^  ^^ 
clerical  party,  which,  ever  since  1871,  had  been  extremely  church, 
active.  The  Republicans  resented  this  intrusion  of  the 
Catholic  party  into  politics,  and  their  opinion  was  vividly 
expressed  by  Gambetta,  who  in  the  Chamber  threw  out  a 
phrase  which  became  famous — "  Clericalism — that  is  our 
enemy," — meaning  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  was 
the  most  dangerous  opponent  of  the  Republic.  These  Anti- 
Republican  groups  persuaded  President  MacMahon  that 
he  was  not  bound  to  accept  a  ministry  at  the  bidding  of 
the  Chambers,  that  he  had  the  right  to  a  personal  policy, 
a  programme  of  his  own.  As  certain  elections  of  the  bodies 
which  participated  in  the  choice  of  senators  were  to  be 
held  toward  the  close  of  1877,  and  as  they  would  probably 
result  in  the  Republicans  capturing  the  Senate,  if  conducted 
by  a  Republican  ministry,  and  as  he  believed  that  the 
triumph  of  the  Republicans  would  be  harmful  to  France, 
to  the  army,  to  foreign  prestige,  MacMahon  virtually  dis- 
missed. May  16,  1877,  the  Simon  ministry,  which  had  the 
support  of  the  Chamber,  and  appointed  a  ministry,  composed 
largely  of  Monarchists,  under  the  Duke  de  Broglie.  There- 
upon, the  Senate,  representing  the  same  views,  consented  to 
the  dissolution  of  the  Chamber,  and  new  elections  were  pre- 
pared. 

Thus  a  constitutional  question  was  created — the  relation  MacMahon's 
of  the  Presidency  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.     If  the  Presi-  conception 
dent  was  to  resemble  the  British  sovereign,  he  had  no  right  presidency, 
to  a  personal  policy  of  his  own,  no  right  to  dismiss  ministers 
acceptable  to  Parliament.      MacMahon's  opinion  was  that 
he  had  that  right,  and  that  "  if  the  Chamber  did  not  ap- 
prove,  it  remained   for   the   people   to   decide   between   him 
and  it  "  by  a  dissolution  and  new  elections. 


350      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

This  was  a  contest  for  political  power  between  the  Presi- 
dent and  the  Senate  on  the  one  hand,  the  Chamber  on  the 
other.  As  the  Constitution  gave  the  President  and  Senate 
the  right  to  dissolve  the  Chamber,  they  had  the  upper  hand, 
at  least  until  the  people  voted.  A  crisis  had  arisen  which 
involved  an  intei'pretation  of  the  Constitution.  The  Presi- 
dent did  not  consider  himself  a  mere  figurehead,  did  not 
propose  to  consider  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  as  supreme. 

Tliis  question  was  now  fought  out  before  the  people.  A 
new  Chamber  of  Deputies  was  to  be  chosen.  The  Broglie 
ministry  used  every  effort  to  influence  the  voters  against 
Gambetta  and  the  Republicans.  Republican  office-holders 
were  removed  and  reactionaries  put  in  their  place.  The 
political  machinery  was  used  to  hamper  the  Republicans, 
to  silence  or  curb  the  Republican  newspapers.  Gambetta 
coined  another  famous  phrase,  when  he  declared  that  after 
the  people  should  have  spoken,  MacMahon  must  "  either 
submit  or  resign."  For  this  he  was  prosecuted,  and 
condemned  to  three  months  of  prison  and  a  fine  of  2,000 
francs.  Official  candidates  were  put  forth  for  the  Chamber, 
supported  by  the  ministry  and  office-holders.  The  clergy 
took  an  active  part  in  the  campaign,  supporting  the  official 
candidates,  and  preaching  against  the  Republicans,  conduct 
which  in  the  end  was  to  cost  them  dear.  The  struggle  was 
embittered.  It  was  a  contest  between  the  monarchical  and 
republican  principles,  with  the  clergy,  then  very  influential, 
in  favor  of  the  former.  The  bishops  ordered  a  supplication 
for  a  favorable  vote.  The  supplication  was  apparently 
Victory  of  not  heard.  The  Republicans  were  overwhelmingly  victorious, 
the  Repub-  j^  the  new  Chamber  they  had  a  majority  of  over  a  hundred, 
leans.  MacMahon  "  submitted,"  and  took  a  Republican  ministry. 

In  the  next  year,  1878,  an  election  of  one-third  of  the 
Senate  occurred.  The  Republicans  now  gained  control  of 
that  body.  With  both  Chambers  Republican,  Marshal  Mac- 
Mahon's  position  became  very  difficult.  The  Chambers  de- 
manded the  retirement  from  the  army  of  certain  generals, 


REPUBLICAN  LEGISLATION  351 

who  were  opposed  to  the  Repubhcans.  MacMahon  refused 
to  remove  them  on  the  ground  that  this  would  be  prejudicial 
to  the  army,  which  should  be  kept  out  of  politics.  Rather 
than  acquiesce  he  resigned  the  Presidency,  January  30,  1879.  B,esignation 
The  National  Assembly  immediately  met  and  elected  Jules «  j,  r^ 
Grevy  president,  a  man  whose  devotion  to  Republican  prin- 
ciples had  been  known  to  France  for  thirty  years.  For  the 
first  time  since  1871  the  Republicans  controlled  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies,  the  Senate,  and  the  Presidency.  Since  that 
time  the  Republic  has  been  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  Re- 
publicans. 

REPUBLICAN  LEGISLATION 

Jules  Grevy  had  in  1848  advocated  the  suppression  of  Grevy 
the  Presidency  on  the  ground  that  one-man  power  was  giflent 
dangerous.  He  now  administered  the  office  in  a  manner 
sharply  contrasting  with  that  of  MacMahon.  He  had  no 
personal  policy,  he  never  personally  intervened  in  the  con- 
duct of  affairs ;  that  was  the  province  of  the  ministry.  His 
example  has  been  followed  by  succeeding  presidents.  Thus 
the  Presidency  has  lost  any  suggestion  of  monarchy  it  may 
ever  have  had.  In  the  war  of  politics  the  President  is  a 
neutral  figure,  affihating  with  no  party. 

The  Republicans,  now  completely  victorious,  and  no  Republican 
longer  merely  on  the  defensive,  shortly  broke  up  into  numer-  legislation, 
ous  groups.  Ministries  changed  with  great  frequency,  and 
it  is  not  in  the  permutations  and  combinations  of  politicians 
that  the  main  significance  of  the  next  period  lies,  but  in 
the  constinictive  work  which  aimed  to  consolidate  the  Re- 
public. Two  personalities  stand  out  with  particular  promi- 
nence: Gambetta,  as  president  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
and  Jules  Ferry,  as  member  of  several  ministries  and  as 
twice  prime  minister.  The  legislation  enacted  during  this 
period  aimed  to  clinch  the  victory  over  the  Monarchists 
and  Clericals  by  making  the  institutions  of  France  thoroughly 
republican  and  secular.     The  seat  of  government  was  trans- 


35iJ      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


Creation 
of  a 

national 
system  of 
education. 


ferred  from  Versailles,  where  it  had  been  since  1871,  to 
Paris  (1880),  and  July  14th,  the  day  of  the  storming  of 
the  Bastille,  symbol  of  the  triumph  of  the  people  over  the 
monarchy,  was  declared  the  national  holiday,  and  was  cele- 
brated for  the  first  time  in  1880  amid  great  enthusiasm. 
The  right  of  citizens  freely  to  hold  public  meetings  as  they 
might  wish,  and  without  any  preliminary  permission  of 
the  Government,  was  secured,  as  was  also  a  practically 
unlimited  freedom  of  the  press  (1881).  Municipal  councils 
were  once  more  given  the  right  to  elect  mayors  (1882),  and 
their  administrative  power  was  greatly  augmented  (1884). 
This  was  an  enlargement  of  the  sphere  of  local  self-govern- 
ment, a  great  school  of  political  training  for  the  people. 
Workingmen  were  permitted,  for  the  first  time,  freely  to  form 
trades  unions  (1884).  Divorce,  which  Napoleon  had  in- 
troduced into  the  Code,  but  which  was  abolished  in  1814, 
was  restored  in  1884. 

The  Republicans  were  particularly  solicitous  about  educa- 
tion. As  universal  suffrage  was  the  basis  of  the  state,  it 
was  considered  fundamental  that  the  voters  should  be  in- 
telligent. Education  was  regarded  as  the  strongest  bulwark 
of  the  Republic.  Several  laws  were  passed,  concerning  all 
grades  of  education,  but  the  most  important  were  those 
concerning  primary  schools.  A  law  of  1881  made  primary 
education  gratuitous ;  one  of  1882  made  it  compulsory  be- 
between  the  ages  of  six  and  thirteen,  and  later  laws  made  it 
entirely  secular.  No  religious  instruction  is  given  in  these 
schools.  All  teachers  are  appointed  from  the  laity.  This 
system  of  popular  education  is  one  of  the  great  creative 
achievements  of  the  Republic,  and  one  of  the  most  fruitful. 
It  has  increased  the  number  of  those  in  primary  schools,  by 
850,000.  IlHteracy  has  dropped  from  25  per  cent,  to  4 
per  cent,  for  the  men,  and  from  38  per  cent,  to  7  per  cent,  for 
the  women.  To  carry  out  this  system  immense  expenditures 
have  been  necessary,  to  erect  schoolhouses  and  to  employ 
more    teachers.       Twenty-five    thousand    schoolhouses    have 


LAWS  CONCERNING  EDUCATION  353 

been  built,  or  rebuilt,  at  an  expense  of  over  140  million 
dollars,  and  the  appropriations  for  the  maintenance,  which 
falls  upon  the  state,  for  primary  education  is  an  affair 
of  the  nation,  not  of  the  locality,  has  trebled.  This  legis- 
lation was  enacted  under  the  vigorous  direction  and  in- 
spiration of  the  Minister  of  Public  Instruction,  Jules  Ferry, 
and  is  one  of  his  most  enduring  titles  to  fame.  Laws  were 
also  passed  concerning  secondary,  university,  and  technical 
education.  The  Government  undertook  in  this  legislation 
to  free  the  schools  from  all  clerical  control,  on  the  ground 
that  the  clergy  were  enemies  of  the  Republic.  Further 
evidences  of  this  anti-clerical  feeling  are  found  in  the  ex- 
pulsion of  the  Jesuits  from  France  in  1880,  and  in  the  re- 
fusal to  all.  unauthorized  religious  orders  of  the  right  to 
maintain  schools.  Schools  might,  however,  be  maintained 
by  the  secular  clergy  and  by  those  orders  which  should  receive 
the  sanction  of  the  Government. 

The  Republic   also   entered   upon   a   policy   of  large   ex-  Public 
penditures  for  public  works,  such  as   the  building  of  rail-      °^  ^' 
ways,  canals,  the  dredging  of  harbors  and  rivers,  the  erec- 
tion  and  equipment   of  fortresses    along   the   Belgian   and 
German  frontiers. 

In  1884  the  Constitution  was  revised  in  that  the  principle  Revision 
of  life  membership  in  the  Senate  was  abolished.     There  were  f 

75  such  seats.     It  was  provided  that,  as  these  seats  became  ^^^^^ 
vacant,   they   should   be   filled  by   the   election    of   ordinary 
senators,  for  the  regular  term  of  nine  years. 

Under  the  masterful  influence  of  Jules  Ferry,  prime  minis- 
ter in  1881,  and  again  from  1883  to  1885,  the  Republic 
embarked  upon  an  aggressive  foreign  policy.  She  estab- 
lished a  protectorate  over  Tunis ;  sent  an  expedition  to 
Tonkin,  to  Madagascar;  founded  the  French  Congo.  This  Colonial 
policy  aroused  bitter  opposition  from  the  beginning,  and  ^°  ^^^' 
entailed  large  expenditures,  but  Ferry,  regardless  of  grow- 
ing opposition,  forced  it  through,  in  the  end  to  his  own 
undoing.      His  motives  in  throwing  France  into  these  ven- 


354      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


Increase 
of  the 
national 
debt. 


tures  were  various.  One  reason  was  economic.  France 
was  feeling  the  rivalry  of  Germany  and  Italy,  and  Ferry 
believed  that  she  must  gain  new  markets  as  compensation 
for  those  she  was  gradually  losing.  Again,  France  would 
gain  in  prestige  abroad,  and  in  her  own  feeling  of  con- 
tentment, if  she  turned  her  attention  to  empire-building  and 
ceased  to  think  morbidly  of  her  losses  in  the  German  war. 
Her  outlook  would  be  broader.  Moreover,  she  could  not 
afford  to  be  passive  when  other  nations  about  her  were 
reaching  out  for  Africa  and  Asia.  The  era  of  imperialism 
had  begun.  France  must  participate  in  the  movement  or  be 
left  hopelessly  behind  in  the  rivalry  of  nations.  Under 
Ferry's  resolute  leadership  the  policy  of  expansion  was 
carried  out,  and  the  colonial  possessions  of  France  were 
greatly  increased,  but  at  the  expense  of  political  peace  at 

home. 

THE  RISE  OF  BOULANGISM 

Policies  so  decided,  so  far-reaching,  so  ambitious  had 
many  enemies — Clericals,  Monarchists.  Such  sweeping  un- 
dertakings as  educational  reform  and  empire-building  were 
very  expensive.  The  Government  gave  up  all  idea  of 
economy,  and  was  forced  to  negotiate  new  loans,  thereby 
greatly  increasing  the  national  debt,  and  to  levy  new  taxes. 
Moreover,  there  was  a  vigorous  group  of  Republicans,  the 
Radicals,  whose  leader  was  Clemenceau,  who  denounced  these 
colonial  enterprises  as  involving  war,  which  they  hated, 
as  being  an  attack  upon  other  peoples  who  had  a  right  to 
be  free,  as  expensive  and  therefore  an  unjustifiable  luxury 
for  a  country  that  had  been  through  the  experience  of 
France,  and  as  tending  to  divert  attention  from  domestic 
problems,  whose  solution  they  felt  to  be  urgent.  These  Rad- 
ical Republicans  demanded  the  separation  of  Church  and 
State,  the  reduction  of  the  powers  of  the  Senate,  an  income 
tax  that  wealth  might  bear  its  proper  proportion  of  the 
burdens  of  the  state.  The  rivalry  of  the  Republican  factions 
now  lost  all  bounds,  and  when  a  false  rumor  reached  Paris  of  a 


DISCONTENT  WITH  THE  REPUBLIC        355 

failure  of  the  war  in  Tonkin,  these  Radicals  joined  with  the 
Monarchists  and  Clericals  in  May  1885  to  overthrow  Ferry, 
one  of  the  strong  figures  of  the  Republic's  history.  Though 
he  had  vastly  augmented  the  empire,  public  opinion  had  been 
so  vehemently  aroused  by  the  campaign  of  attack  and  slander 
against  him  that  he  had  become  extremely  unpopular. 

During  the  next  three  years,  from  1886  to  1889,  the 
political  situation  was  troubled,  uncertain,  factious,  nervous. 
There  was  no  commanding  personality  in  politics  to  give  Death  of 
elevation  and  sweep  to  men's  ideas.  Gambetta  had  died  in  Gambetta. 
1882  at  the  age  of  forty-four,  and  Ferry  was  most  unjustly 
the  victim  of  obloquy,  from  which  he  never  recovered.  Minis- 
tries succeeded  each  other  with  meaningless  rapidity. 
Politics  appeared  to  be  merely  a  petty  game  of  getting 
offices,  not  of  pursuing  matured  policies  of  state.  There 
was  a  great  deal  of  discontent  with  the  Republic.  Many  Discontent 
had  been  embittered  by  the  policy  of  secularizing  education ; 
many  by  the  colonial  ventures.  The  Republic  was  a  parlia- 
mentary republic,  and  parliamentary  institutions  were  in  the 
opinion  of  many  utterly  discredited.  The  incessant  changes 
of  ministries,  the  petty  and  bitter  personalities  of  political 
life,  the  absence  of  conspicuous  leaders  with  large  ideas,  ren- 
dered France  disillusioned  and  bored.  The  Republic  was 
spending  more  than  its  income  on  the  various  undertakings  de- 
scribed above,  and  deficits  were  the  result,  alarming  the 
public  mind.  Just  at  this  time,  too,  a  scandal  was  un- 
earthed in  President  Grevy's  own  household.  His  son-in- 
law,  Wilson,  was  found  to  be  using  his  influence  for  pur- 
poses of  trafficking  in  the  bestowal  of  places  in  the  Legion 
of  Honor,  and  as  a  result,  the  President,  in  no  sense  in- 
volved, yet  defending  his  son-in-law,  was  forced  to  resign, 
and  was  succeeded  by  Carnot,  a  moderate  Republican  (De- 
cember 3,  1887).  Moreover,  many  believed  that  as  no 
regime  in  France  for  a  century  had  outlasted  eighteen  years, 
the  Republic  would  form  no  exception,  and  the  eighteen  years 
were  nearly  up. 


356      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

Such  a  state  of  discontent  and  despondency,  justified  in 
part,  in  part  fictitious,  created  a  real  crisis  for  the  Re- 
public, in  which  its  very  life  was  at  stake.  If  the  Parlia- 
mentary Republic  was  unable  to  give  a  strong  and  intelli- 
gent government,  might  not  France  welcome  a  dictator,  as 
she  had  done  in  the  case  of  two  previous  republics?  A 
person  was  at  hand  anxious  to  serve  in  this  capacity, 
Boulanger.  General  Boulanger.  A  dashing  figure  on  horseback,  an 
attractive  speaker.  General  Boulanger  sought  to  use  the 
popular  discontent  for  his  own  advancement.  Made  Minis- 
ter of  War  in  1886,  he  showed  much  activity,  seeking  the 
favor  of  the  soldiers  by  improving  the  conditions  of  life 
in  the  barracks,  and  by  advocating  the  reduction  of  the 
required  term  of  service.  He  controlled  several  newspapers, 
which  began  to  insinuate  that  under  his  leadership  France 
could  take  her  revenge  upon  Germany  by  a  successful  war 
upon  that  country.  The  scandal  of  the  Legion  of  Honor 
decorations  occurring  opportunely,  and  involving  the  resigna- 
tion of  the  President,  encouraged  his  campaign.  He  posed 
as  the  rescuer  of  the  Republic,  demanding  a  total  revision 
of  the  Constitution.  His  programme,  as  announced,  was 
vague,  but  probably  aimed  at  the  diminution  of  the  import- 
ance of  Parliament,  and  the  conferring  of  great  powers  upon 
the  President,  and  his  election  directly  by  the  people,  which  he 
hoped  would  be  favorable  to  himself.  For  three  years  his 
personality  was  a  storm  center.  Discontented  people  of  the 
most  varied  shades  flocked  to  his  support — ^Monarchists, 
Imperialists,  Clericals,  hoping  to  use  him  to  overturn  the 
Republic.  These  parties  contributed  money  to  the  support  of 
his  campaign,  which  was  brilliantly  managed,  with  the  view 
to  focusing  popular  attention  upon  him.  To  show  the  popu- 
lar enthusiasm  Boulanger  now  became  a  candidate  for  Parlia- 
ment in  many  districts  where  vacancies  occurred.  In  five 
months  (1888)  he  was  elected  deputy  sis  times.  A  seventh 
election  in  Paris  itself,  in  January  1889,  resulted  in  a 
brilliant  triumph.     He  was  elected  by  over  80,000  majority. 


COLLAPSE  OF  BOULANGISM  357 

Would  he  dare  take  tlie  final  step  and  attempt  to  seize 
power,  as  two  Bonapartes  had  done  before  him?  He  did 
not  have  the  requisite  audacity  to  try.  In  the  face  of 
this  imminent  danger  the  Republicans  ceased  their  dissen- 
sions and  stood  together.  They  assumed  the  offensive. 
The  ministry  summoned  Boulanger  to  appear  before  the 
Senate,  sitting  as  a  High  Court  of  Justice,  to  meet  the 
charge  of  conspiring  against  the  safety  of  the  state.  His 
boldness  vanished.  He  fled  from  the  country  to  Belgium. 
He  was  condemned  by  the  Court  in  his  absence.  His  party 
fell  to  pieces,  its  leader  proving  so  little  valorous.  Two 
years  later  he  committed  suicide.  The  Republic  had  The 
weathered  a  serious  crisis.  In  the  elections  to  the  Chamber  ^g^^j^gj-g 
of  Deputies  of  1889  the  Republicans  defeated  badly  all  oppo-  the  crisis, 
nents — Monarchists,  Imperialists,  Boulangists — gaining  a 
majority  of  nearly  a  hundred  and  fifty.  It  was  clear  that 
the  Republic  was  becoming  year  by  year  more  solidly  estab- 
lished in  the  devotion  of  the  voters.  This  was  shown  again 
still  more  strongly  four  years  later,  in  the  elections  of  1893. 
The  utter  collapse  of  Boulanger  had  several  important 
consequences.  It  strengthened  the  Republic,  proved  its 
vitality,  and  discredited  its  opponents.  It  also  discredited 
the  idea  of  a  revision  of  tlie  Constitution.  From  now  on 
conditions  began  to  improve.  The  Exposition  of  1889  in 
Paris  was  a  great  success,  proved  to  all  the  world  the  re- 
markable recuperation  of  France,  and  was  a  reminder  of 
the  Revolution  of  1789,  from  which  the  country  had  gained 
so  much.  Convinced  that  the  Republic  was  to  be  perma- 
nent and  not  a  transitory  phenomenon.  Pope  Leo  XIII 
ordered  the  bishops  to  cease  their  attacks  upon  it, 
and  in  Parliament  a  certain  number  of  Catholic  politicians 
rallied  to  it.  In  1891  an  alliance  was  made  with  Russia,  The  Dual 
which  ended  the  long  period  of  diplomatic  Isolation,  served 
as  a  counterweight  to  the  Triple  Alliance  of  Germany, 
Austria,  and  Italy,  and  satisfied  the  French  people,  as  well  as 
increased  their  sense  of  safety  and  their  confidence  in  the 


358      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

future.  In  1892  France  entered  upon  a  policy  of  high 
tariffs  for  purposes  of  protection. 

The  Republicans  were  henceforth  in  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority, but  divided  into  various  groups.  The  Radicals 
were  more  numerous  than  before,  and  a  new  party  appeared, 
the  Socialists,  with  some  sixty  members.  As  the  Republic 
was  becoming  more  solidly  established,  it  was  also  becom- 
ing more  radical.  The  history  of  the  next  fifteen  years 
was  to  be  the  proof  of  this. 

In  1894<  President  Carnot  was  assassinated.  Casimir- 
Perier  was  chosen  to  succeed  him,  but  resigned  after  six 
months.  Felix  Faure,  a  moderate  Republican,  was  chosen 
to  succeed  him.  Under  ^c^'aure  the  alliance  with  Russia  was 
still  further  strengthened  and  proclaimed.  This  is  the  most 
important  fact  in  the  recent  diplomatic  history  of  France, 
tending  to  raise  her  international  position,  and  to  make 
her  more  contented  by  gratifying  her  self-esteem,  and  by  in- 
creasing her  sense  of  security. 

Faure  died  in  office  in  1899.  Under  his  presidency  (1895- 
1899)  the  most  burning  question  of  internal  politics  was 
the  Dreyfus  case,  for  many  years  a  dominant  issue,  creating 
another  serious  crisis  for  the  Republic.  An  examination  of 
that  case  is  essential  to  an  understanding  of  recent  French 
history. 

THE  DREYFUS  CASE 

The  In  October  1894,  Alfred  Dreyfus,  an  Alsatian  Jew,  and 

Dreyfus  g^  captain  in  the  artillery,  attached  to  the  General  Staff, 
was  arrested  amid  circumstances  of  unusual  secrecy,  was 
treated  with  great  harshness,  and  was  brought  before  a  court- 
martial,  where  he  was  accused  of  treason,  of  transmitting 
important  military  documents  to  a  foreign  power,  presuma- 
bly Germany.  The  accusation  rested  on  a  document  that 
had  come  into  the  possession  of  the  War  Office,  and  was 
soon  to  be  famous  as  the  "  bordereau,"  a  memorandum 
merely   containing   a   list   of   several   documents   said  to   be 


case. 


DREYFUS  CONVICTED  OF  TREASON   359 

inclosed.  The  bordereau  bore  no  address,  no  date,  nor 
signature,  but  it  was  declared  to  be  in  the  known  hand- 
writing of  Dreyfus.  The  court-martial,  acting  behind 
closed  doors,  found  him  guilty,  and  condemned  him  to  ex- 
pulsion from  the  army  and  to  imprisonment  for  life.  In 
January  1895  he  was  publicly  degraded  in  a  most  dramatic  Dreyfus 

manner    in    the    courtyard   of    the   Military    School,    before      °  . 

•^  .  .  ^"d  im- 

a  large  detachment  of  the   army.       His   stripes   were   torn  prisoned. 

from  his  uniform,  his  sword  was  broken.      Throughout  this 

agonizing  scene  he  was  defiant,  asserted  his  innocence,  and 

shouted  "  Vive  la  France!  "      He  was  then  deported  to  a 

small,  barren,  and  unhealthy  island  off  French  Guiana,  in 

South  America,  appropriately  called  Devil's  Island,  and  was 

there  kept  in  solitary   confinement.       A  life  imprisonment 

under  such  conditions  would  probably  not  be  long,  though 

it  would  certainly  be  horrible. 

No  one  questioned  the  justice  of  the  verdict.  The  opinion 
was  practically  unanimous  that  he  had  received  a  traitor's 
deserts.  Only  the  immediate  family  and  circle  of  Dreyfus 
maintained  that  a  monstrous  wrong  had  been  done,  and 
demanded  further  investigation.  Their  protests  passed  un- 
heeded.     The  case  was  considered  closed. 

It  was  reopened  in  1896  by  Colonel  Picquart,  one  of  the  Picquart. 
youngest  and  most  promising  officers  in  the  army,  attached 
since  June  1895  to  the  detective  bureau,  or  Intelligence 
Department,  of  the  General  Staff.  In  the  course  of  his 
duties  he  had  become  convinced  that  the  "  bordereau  "  was 
not  the  work  of  Dreyfus,  but  of  a  certain  Major  Esterhazy, 
who  was  shortly  shown  to  be  one  of  the  most  abandoned 
characters  in  the  army.  Picquart  informed  liis  superior, 
the  Minister  of  War,  of  this  discovery.  The  military 
authorities,  instead  of  investigating  the  matter,  not  wishing 
to  have  the  case  reopened,  sent  Picquart  to  Tunis  and 
Algeria,  the  purpose  apparently  being  to  get  him  out  of 
the  way.      Colonel  Henry  was  appointed  to  his  place. 

By  this  time  the  public  was  becoming  interested.     Some 


360      Fr^NCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

of  the  documents  in  the  famous  case  had  found  their  way 
into  print;  the  mysterious  elements  in  the  proceedings 
aroused  curiosity  and  some  uneasiness. 

Toward  the  end  of  1897,  Scheurer-Kestner,  a  vice-presi- 
dent of  the  Senate,  who  had  become  convinced  of  the  inno- 
cence of  Dreyfus,  tried  to  have  the  case  reopened.  His 
efforts  met  with  the  blunt  statement  of  the  prime  minister, 
Meline,  that  the  Dreyfus  case  no  longer  existed,  was  a 
chose  jugee.  But  the  fact  that  a  man  of  such  importance, 
and  such  known  integrity  of  character  and  mind,  as  Scheurer- 
Kestner,  was  convinced  that  a  cruel  wrong  had  been  com- 
mitted, was  of  unmistakable  consequence.  The  wrath  of 
the  anti-Dreyfus  party  was  increased;  criminations  and  re- 
criminations flew  back  and  forth.  Race  hatred  of  the  Jews, 
zealously  fanned  for  several  years  by  a  group  of  journalists, 
fed  the  flames. 

Esterhazy  was  now  brought  before  a  court-martial,  given 
a  very  travesty  of  a  trial,  and  triumphantly  acquitted,  con- 
gratulated, avec  emotion,  by  the  members  of  the  court  itself 
(January  11,  1898).  On  the  next  day  Colonel  Picquart 
was  arrested  and  imprisoned  on  charges  made  by  Esterhazy. 
Zola  On  the  day  following  that,  January  13th,  Emile  Zola,  the 

attempts  to  ^yell-known  novelist,  published  a  letter  of  great  boldness  and 
reopen    the 

brilliancy,  in  which  he  made  most  scathmg  charges  aganist 

the  judges  of  both  the  Dreyfus  and  Esterhazy  courts-martial, 

and  practically  dared  the  Government  to  prosecute  him.     His 

desire  was  thus  to  reopen  the  whole  Dreyfus  question.     The 

Government  prosecuted  him  in  a  trial  which  was  a  parody 

of  justice,   secured  his   condemnation   to  imprisonment   and 

fine,    and    evaded    the    question     of    Dreyfus.      The    Zola 

condemnation   was   later   quashed   by   a   higher   court   on    a 

mere   technicality.     He   was   later   tried   again,   and   again 

coildemned  (July  1898)  by  default,  having  fled  to  London. 

The  Dreyfus  case  had  not  been  reopened. 

Meanwhile,  the  Meline  ministry  had  been  overthrown,  and 

the  Brisson  ministry  had  come  into  power,  with  Cavaignac 


case. 


CAVAIGNAC  AND  THE  DREYFUS  CASE     361 

as    Minister    of   War.     On    July    7,    1898,    Cavaignac,    in-  Speech  of 
tending  to  settle  this  troublesome  matter  once  for  all,  made  „.  .  ^       ' 
a  speech  before  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  in  wliich,  omitting  of  War. 
all  mention  of  the  bordereau,  he  brought  forward  three  docu- 
ments as  new  proofs  of  the  guilt  of  Dreyfus.     His  speech  was 
so  convincing  that  the  Chamber,  by  a  vote  of  five  hundred 
and  seventy-two  to  two,  ordered  that  it  should  be  posted  In 
every  one  of  the  thirty-six  thousand  communes  of  France. 
The  victory  was  overwhelming. 

Immediately,  however.  Colonel  Picquart  wrote  to  Cavai- 
gnac  that  he  could  prove  that  the  first  two  documents  cited 
had  nothing  to  do  with  Dreyfus,  and  that  the  third  was  an 
outright  forgery.  He  was  rearrested.  It  was  immediately 
after  this  that  Zola  was  condemned  for  the  second  time,  as 
stated  above. 

Events  now  took  a  most  sensational  turn.  At  the  end  of 
August  the  newspapers  of  Paris  contained  the  announce- 
ment that  Colonel  Henry  had  confessed  that  he  had  forged 
the  document  which  Picquart  had  declared  was  a  forgery 
and  that  then  he  had  committed  suicide.  Cavaignac  re- 
signed, maintaining,  however,  that  the  crime  of  Henry  did  not 
prove  the  innocence  of  Dreyfus. 

The  public  was  vastly  disturbed  by  these  events.  Why 
was  there  any  need  of  new  proof  to  establish  Dreyfus's 
guilt,  and  if  the  new  proof  was  the  work  of  crime,  what 
about  the  original  proof,  the  famous  bordereau?  At  this 
juncture  the  case  was  referred  to  the  Court  of  Cassation, 
the  highest  court  In  France.  While  it  was  deliberating,  the 
President,  Faure,  known  as  an  anti-Dreyfusite,  died  suddenly 
under  somewhat  mysterious  circumstances,  and  on  February 
18,  1899,  Emile  Loubet,  known  to  be  favorable  to  a  reopen- 
ing of  the  question,  was  chosen  as  his  successor. 

Sensations  showed  no  signs  of  abating.  On  June  2nd, 
Esterhazy,  who  had  fled  to  England,  announced  that  he  had 
himself  written  the  bordereau.  The  enemies  of  Dreyfus  now 
asserted  that  he   had   simply   been   bribed  by   the   Dreyfus 


362      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


Court 

of  Cassation 

orders  a 

retrial   of 

Dreyfus, 


Dreyfus 
again 
declared 
guilty. 


Dreyfus 
pardoned. 


party  to  make  this  declaration.  On  the  next  day  the  Court 
of  Cassation  annulled  the  decision  of  the  court-martial  of 
189-i,  and  ordered  that  Dre3'fus  be  tried  again  before  a 
court-martial  at  Rennes.  Dreyfus  was  brought  from  Devil's 
Island,  and  his  second  trial  began  in  August  1899. 

This  new  trial  was  conducted  in  the  midst  of  the  most 
excited  state  of  the  public  mind  in  France,  and  of  intense 
interest  abroad.  Party  passions  were  inflamed  as  they  had 
not  been  in  France  since  the  Commune.  The  supporters 
of  Dreyfus  were  denounced  frantically  as  slanderers  of  the 
honor  of  the  army,  the  very  bulwark  of  the  safety  of  the 
country,  as  traitors  to  France. 

At  the  Rennes  tribunal,  Dreyfus  encountered  the  violent 
hostility  of  the  high  army  officers,  who  had  been  liis  accusers 
five  years  before.  These  men  were  desperately  resolved  that 
he  should  again  be  found  guilty.  The  trial  was  of  an  ex- 
traordinary character.  It  was  the  evident  purpose  of  the 
judges  not  to  allow  the  matter  to  be  thoroughly  probed. 
Testimony,  which  in  England  or  America  would  have  been 
considered  absolutely  vital,  was  barred  out.  The  universal 
opinion  outside  France  was,  as  was  stated  in  the  London 
Times,  "  that  the  whole  case  against  Captain  Dreyfus,  as  set 
forth  by  the  heads  of  the  French  army,  in  plain  combination 
against  him,  was  foul  with  forgeries,  lies,  contradictions  and 
puerilities,  and  that  nothing  to  justify  his  condemnation 
had  been  shown," 

Nevertheless,  the  court,  by  a  vote  of  five  to  two,  declared 
him  guilty,  "  with  extenuating  circumstances,"  an  amazing 
verdict.  It  is  not  generally  held  that  treason  to  one's 
country  can  plead  extenuating  circumstances.  The  court 
condemned  him  to  ten  years'  imprisonment,  from  which  the 
years  spent  at  Devil's  Island  might  be  deducted.  Thus  the 
"  honor  "  of  the  army  had  been  maintained. 

President  Loubet  immediately  pardoned  Dreyfus,  and  he 
was  released,  broken  in  health.  This  solution  was  satis- 
factory to  neither  side.     The  anti-Dreyfusites  vented  their 


VINDICATION  OF  DREYFUS  363 

rage  on  Loubet.     On   the   other  hand,   Dreyfus   demanded 
exoneration,  a  recognition  of  his  innocence,  not  pardon. 

But  the  Government  was  resolved  that  this  discussion, 
which  had  so  frightfully  torn  French  society,  should  cease. 
Against  the  opposition  of  the  Dreyfusites,  it  passed,  in  1900, 
an  amnesty  for  all  those  implicated  in  the  notorious  case, 
which  meant  that  no  legal  actions  could  be  brought  against 
any  of  the  participants  on  either  side.  The  friends  of 
Dreyfus,  Zola,  and  Picquart  protested  vigorously  against  the 
erection  of  a  barrier  against  their  vindication.  The  bill, 
nevertheless,  passed. 

Six  years  later,  however,  the  Dreyfus  party  attained  its  Dreyfus 
vindication.  The  revision  of  the  whole  case  was  submitted  to  ^^^^icated. 
the  Court  of  Cassation.  On  July  12,  1906,  that  body  quashed 
the  verdict  of  the  Rennes  court-martial.  It  declared  that 
the  charges  which  had  been  brought  against  Dreyfus  had  no 
foundation,  that  the  bordereau  was  the  work  of  Esterhazy, 
that  another  document  of  importance  was  a  forgery,  that 
the  Rennes  court-martial  had  been  guilty  of  gross  injustice 
in  refusing  to  hear  testimony  that  would  have  established 
the  innocence  of  the  accused.  The  case  was  not  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  another  military  tribunal  but  was  closed. 

The  Government  now  restored  Captain  Dreyfus  to  his 
rank  in  the  army,  or  rather,  gave  him  the  rank  of  major, 
allowing  him  to  count  to  that  end  the  whole  time  in  which 
he  had  been  unjustly  deprived  of  his  standing.  On  July 
21,  1906,  he  was  invested  with  a  decoration  of  the  Legion 
of  Honor  in  the  very  courtyard  of  the  Military  School, 
where  eleven  years  before  he  had  been  so  dramatically  de- 
graded. Colonel  Picquart  was  promoted  brigadier-general, 
and  shortly  became  Minister  of  War.  Zola  had  died  in 
1903,  but  in  1908  his  body  was  transferred  to  the  Pantheon, 
as  symbolizing  a  kind  of  civic  canonization.  Thus  ended 
the  "  Affair." 

The  Dreyfus  case,  originally  simply  Involving  the  fate 
of  an  alleged  traitor,  had  soon  acquired  a  far  greater  sig- 


3G4f        FKANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

Significance  nificance.      Party    and    personal    ambitions    and    interests 
of  the  sought  to  use  it  for  purposes  of  their  own,  and  thus  the 

question  of  legal  right  and  wrong  was  woefully  distorted 
and  obscured.  The  Anti-Semites  used  it  to  inflame  the 
people  against  the  Jews.  They  won  the  support  of  the 
Clericals,  ingeniously  suggesting  that  the  so-called  anti- 
religious  legislation  of  the  Third  Republic,  particularly  that 
establishing  secular  education,  was  really  the  work  of  the 
Jews,  influencing  politicians  by  their  money,  and  that  the 
Jews  were  now  getting  control  of  the  army,  and  that 
Dreyfus  himself  showed  how  they  would  use  it  for  traitorous 
purposes.  Further,  reactionaries  of  all  kinds  joined  the 
anti-Dreyfus  party:  Monarchists,  anxious  to  discredit  the 
Republic,  that  thus  they  might  profit ;  so-called  Nationalists, 
anxious  to  change  the  government  along  the  lines  of  Boulan- 
gism  and  to  adopt  a  vigorous  foreign  policy.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  rallied  to  the  defense  of  Dreyfus  those  who 
believed  in  his  innocence,  those  who  denounced  the  hatred  of 
a  race  as  a  relic  of  barbarism,  those  who  believed  that  the 
military  should  be  subordinate  to  the  civil  authority  and 
should  not  regard  itself  above  the  law,  as  these  army  oflicers 
were  doing;  all  who  believed  that  the  whole  opposition  was 
merely  conducting  an  insidious,  covert,  dangerous  attack 
upon  the  Republic,  and  all  who  believed  that  clerical  influence 
should  be  kept  out  of  politics. 

THE  SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE 
Formation  One  result  of  the  Dreyfus  agitation  was  the  creation  in 

?J^^,.  ^^^^  Chamber  of  Deputies  of  a  strong  coalition,  called  the 
"  Bloc,"  which  consisted  of  the  Radical  Republican  and 
Socialist  parties.  This  coalition  has,  in  the  main,  sub- 
sisted ever  since,  and  has  controlled  the  government.  Its 
first  conspicuous  head  was  Waldeck-Rousseau,  a  leader  of 
the  Parisian  bar,  a  former  follower  of  Gambetta.  In 
October  1900,  Waldeck-Rousseau,  then  prime  minister,  made 
a  speech  at  Toulouse  which  resounded  throughout  France. 


"  Bloc' 


GROWTH  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  ORDERS     365 

and  wliich  foreshadowed  a  policy  which  has  filled  the  recent 

history  of  France.     The  real  peril  confronting  France,  he  ftuestion 

.J  £  i.^  •  e        ^■    •  i  of  Church 

said,  arose  irom  the  growing  power  oi   religious  orders —      d  st  t 

orders  of  monks  and  nuns.  "  In  this  country,  whose  moral 
unity  lias  for  centuries  constituted  its  strength  and  great- 
ness, two  classes  of  young  people  are  growing  up  ignorant  of 
each  other  until  the  day  when  they  meet,  so  unlike  as  to  risk 
not  comprehending  one  another.  Such  a  fact  is  explained 
only  by  the  existence  of  a  power  which  is  no  longer  even 
occult,  and  by  the  constitution  in  the  state  of  a  rival 
power."  By  which  was  meant  that  the  youth  of  France  were 
growing  up,  divided  into  two  classes,  whose  outlook  upon 
life,  whose  mental  processes,  whose  opinions  concerning  pol- 
itics and  morals  were  so  widely  at  variance  that  the  moral 
unity  of  the  nation  was  destroyed.  And  the  cause  of  this  was 
the  astonishing  and  dangerous  growth  in  recent  years  of 
religious  orders  or  Congregations,  whose  influence  upon  a 
considerable  and  increasing  section  of  the  young  was  highly 
harmful.  Here  was  a  power  that  was  a  rival  of  the  State. 
Waldeck-Rousseau  pointed  out  that  these  orders,  not  author- 
ized under  the  laws  of  France,  were  growing  rapidly  in  wealth  Growth  of 

and  numbers;  that  between  1877  and  1900  the  number  of  ^^^^i^io^s 

orders, 
nuns  had  increased  from   14,000  to  75,000  m   orders   not 

authorized ;  that  the  monks  numbered  about  190,000 ;  that 
their  property,  held  in  mainmorte,  estimated  at  about  50,- 
000,000  francs  in  the  middle  of  the  century,  had  risen  to 
700,000,000  in  1880,  and  was  more  than  a  billion  francs 
in  1900.  This  vast  absorption  of  wealth,  thus  withdrawn 
from  circulation,  was  an  economic  danger  of  the  first  im- 
portance. But  the  most  serious  feature  was  the  activity  of 
these  orders  in  teaching  and  preaching.  Waldeck-Rousseau 
believed  that  the  education  they  gave  was  permeated  with 
a  spirit  of  hostility  to  the  Republic ;  that  the  traditional 
hostility  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  to  liberty  was  in- 
culcated ;  that  this  Roman  spirit  was  a  menace  in  a  country 
that  believed  in  liberty ;  that  it  constituted  a  political  danger 


366   FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The 

Law  of 
Associa- 
tions. 


Religious 
orders  for- 
bidden to 
engage  in 
teaching. 


to  the  State  which  ParHament  must  face ;  that  to  preserve 
the  Republic  defensive  measures  must  be  taken.  Holding  this 
opinion,  the  Waldeck-Rousseau  ministry  secured  the  passage, 
July  1,  1901,  of  the  Law  of  Associations,  which  provided, 
among  other  things,  that  no  religious  orders  should  exist 
in  France  without  definite  authorization  in  each  case  from 
Parliament.  It  was  the  belief  of  the  authors  of  this  bill  that 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  was  the  enemy  of  the  Republic, 
that  it  was  using  its  every  agency  against  the  Republic,  that 
it  had  latterly  supported  the  anti-Dreyfus  party  in  its 
attempt  to  discredit  the  institutions  of  France,  as  it  had  done 
formerly  under  MacMahon.  Gambetta  had,  at  that  time, 
declared  that  the  enemy  was  the  clerical  party.  "  Clerical- 
ism," said  M.  Combes,  who  succeeded  Waldeck-Rousseau  in 
1902,  "  is,  in  fact,  to  be  found  at  the  bottom  of  every 
agitation  and  every  intrigue  from  which  Republican  France 
has  suffered  during  the  last  thirty-five  years." 

Animated  with  this  feeling  the  Associations  Law  was  en- 
forced with  rigor  in  1902  and  1903.  Many  orders  refused 
to  ask  for  authorization  from  Parliament;  many  which  asked 
were  refused.  Tens  of  thousands  of  monks  and  nuns  were 
forced  to  leave  their  institutions,  which  were  closed.  By 
a  law  of  1901<  it  was  provided  that  all  teaching  by  religious 
orders,  even  by  those  authorized,  should  cease  within  ten  years. 
The  State  was  to  have  a  monopoly  of  the  education  of  the 
young,  in  the  interest  of  the  ideals  of  liberalism  it  represented. 
Combes,  upon  whom  fell  the  execution  of  this  law,  suppressed 
about  five  hundred  teaching,  preaching,  and  commercial 
orders.  This  policy  was  vehemently  denounced  by  Catholics 
as  persecution,  as  an  infringement  upon  liberty,  the  liberty 
to  teach,  the  liberty  of  parents  to  have  theit  children  edu- 
cated in  denominational  schools  if  they  preferred. 

This,  as  events  were  to  prove,  was  only  preliminary  to 
a  far  greater  religious  struggle  which  ended  in  the  com- 
plete separation  of  Church  and  State,  the  disestablishment 
of  the  former,  the  laicization  of  the  latter. 


THE  CONCORDAT  OF  1801  367 

The  relations  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  the  State  The 

down  to  1905  were  determined  by  the  Concordat,  concluded  Concordat 

.  1  •         /.  of  1801. 

between  Napoleon  I  and  Pms  VII  m  1801,  and  put  mto  force 

in  1802.  The  Concordat  provided  that  the  archbishops  and 
bishops  should  be  appointed  by  the  State  with  the  consent  of 
the  Pope;  that  the  bishops  should  appoint  the  priests,  but 
only  with  the  consent  of  the  Government ;  that  the  State 
should  pay  the  salaries  of  the  clergy,  both  priests  and  bishops, 
who  thus  became  a  part  of  the  administrative  system  of 
the  country.  Ecclesiastical  property,  cathedrals,  parish 
churches,  residences  of  bishops  and  priests,  and  seminary 
buildings  had  all  been  declared  the  property  of  the  nation 
in  1789,  and  still  remained  such,  but  these  buildings  were 
to  be  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  clergy.  Thus  the  Church 
was  harnessed  to  the  State,  which  had  extensive  powers  over 
it. 

This  system  remained  undisturbed  throughout  the  nine- 
teenth century,  under  the  various  regimes,  but  with  the 
advent  of  the  Third  Republic  serious  friction  began  to  de- 
velop. The  Republicans  believed  in  the  thorough  seculari- 
zation of  the  State,  and  they  were  resolved  that  the  clergy 
should  not  use  their  power  over  men's  minds  and  consciences 
in  opposition  to  the  acts  or  principles  of  the  Republic. 
In  their  determination  to  abolish  ecclesiastical  influence  in 
the  State,  many  measures  were  passed,  between  1881  and 
1903;  schools  were  made  undenominational,  no  clergyman  Anti- 
might  teach  in  them,  no  religious  exercises  might  be  conducted 
_    °  .  .  ,1    legislation, 

in  them;  prayers  at  the  sessions  of  Parliament  were  abol- 
ished; hospitals  were  made  secular;  divorce,  which  had  been 
abolished  in  1814,  was  restored,  and,  as  just  described,  the 
rehgious  orders  were  brought  into  subjection  to  the  State, 
and,  indeed,  largely  dispersed.  These  acts  were  partly  the 
reply  of  the  Republicans  to  the  anti-republican  activity  of 
the  ecclesiastics  which  ran  through  the  whole  thirty  years, 
partly  the  cause  of  that  activity.  The  clergy  were  not 
friendly  to  the  Republic,  from  which  they  drew  their  salaries. 


368      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


The    clergy 
in  the 
Dreyfus 
affair. 


The 

abrogation 
of  the 
Concordat. 


This  is  unquestionable.  The  Pope  himself  recognized  it 
when,  in  1893,  he  urged  the  clergy  to  accept  the  Republic 
as  their  lawful  government.  Many  Republicans  were  not 
only  intent  upon  maintaining  the  Republic,  but  were  anxious 
to  undermine  religion,  considering  it  an  obstacle  in  the  way 
of  progress,  of  civilization.  But  many  who  were  not  opposed 
to  religion  believed  that  religion  did  not  concern  the  State, 
but  was  a  private  matter.  They  held  that  the  State  had 
no  right  to  tax  people  for  the  support  of  a  Church  in  which 
many  had  no  belief  or  interest;  that  the  State  had  no  right 
to  favor  one  denomination  over  another  or  over  all  others ; 
that  it  must,  in  justice  to  all  its  citizens,  be  purely  secular, 
entirely  neutral  toward  all  creeds  and  churches. 

There  was  ceaseless  friction,  then,  for  thirty  years  between 
Church  and  State.  The  opposition  of  the  Republicans  was 
augmented  by  the  activity  of  the  clergy  in  the  Dreyfus 
affair.  Diplomatic  incidents,  in  themselves  of  comparatively 
slight  importance,  brought  matters  to  a  head.  In  April 
1904  the  President  of  France,  Loubet,  went  to  Rome  to 
render  a  visit  to  Victor  Emmanuel  III,  a  "  usurper  "  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Pope.  The  latter  protested  to  the  Catholic 
powers  of  Europe  against  what  he  called  "  a  grave  offense 
to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff."  The  French  in  turn  resented 
what  they  regarded  as  an  impertinent  interference  with  their 
conduct  of  their  foreign  relations.  Other  disturbing  in- 
cidents followed.  These  incidents  did  not  cause  the  rupture ; 
they  merely  furnished  the  occasion. 

Ever  since  June  1903,  a  parliamentary  committee  had  been 
studying  the  problem  and  trying  to  draft  a  measure  of 
separation  of  Church  and  State.  A  law  was  finally  passed, 
December  9,  1905,  which  abrogated  the  Concordat  of  1801. 
The  State  was  henceforth  not  to  pay  the  salaries  of  the 
clergy;  on  the  other  hand,  it  relinquished  all  rights  over 
their  appointment.  It  undertook  to  pay  pensions  to  clergy- 
men who  had  served  many  years,  and  were  already  well  ad- 
vanced in  age ;  also  to  pay  certain  amounts  to  those  who  had 


THE  ASSOCIATIONS  OF  WORSHIP  369 

been  in  the  priesthood   for  a  few  years   only.     In  regard 

to  the  property,  which,  since  1789,  had  been  vested  in  the 

nation,  the  cathedrals,  churches,  chapels,  it  was  provided 

that  these  should  still  be  at  the  free  disposal  of  the  Roman 

Catholic  Church,  but  that  they  should  be  held  and  managed 

by     so-called    "Associations     of    Worship"     (associations  Associa- 

cultuelles),   which  were   to   vary   in  size   according   to   the  J""^  ° 

.  .  Worship, 

population  of  the  community. 

The  law  contained  many  provisions  designed  to  prevent 
these  associations  from  amassing  more  than  a  given  small 
amount  of  wealth  by  legacies,  gifts,  or  otherwise;  and  to 
prevent  the  clergy,  now  cut  off  from  all  official  connection 
with  the  State,  from  using  their  influence  against  the  Re- 
public. The  Church  must  not  become  too  powerful.  It  was 
stated  that  the  property  thus  to  be  left  in  the  hands  of  the 
associations  amounted  to  over  a  hundred  million  dollars. 
The  disestablished  Church  would  not  have  to  make  this 
enormous  expenditure  for  the  construction  of  new  places 
of  worship.  A  year  was  given  for  the  making  lof  the 
necessary  arrangements.^ 

This  law  was  not  universally  condemned  by  the  Catholics 
of  France.  Many  believed  that  the  Church  should 
adapt  itself  to  it,  at  least  provisionally.  Seventy-four 
bishops  decided  to  give  it  a  trial  if  a  certain  alteration 
could  be  made  in  the  character  of  the  Associations  of 
Worship. 

It  is  probable  that  this  change  would  have  been  conceded  Opposition 
by  the  Government,  but  this  was  not  to  be  tested,  for  Pope 
Pius  X  condemned  the  law  of  1905  unreservedly.  He  de- 
clared that  the  fundamental  principle  of  separation  of  Church 
and  State  is  "  an  absolutely  false  thesis,  a  very  pernicious 
error."  He  denounced  the  Associations  of  Worship  as  giving 
the  administrative  control,  not  "  to  the  divinely  instituted 

^  The  Separation  Law  applied  also  to  Protestant  and  Jewish  churches, 
separating  them  from  all  connection  with  the  State,  discontinuing  pay- 
ment by  the  State  of  the  salaries  of  their  clergymen.  These  sects  were 
in  favor  of  the  law. 


370      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 


Law  of 
Jan.  2, 
1907. 


Separation 
of  Church 
and  State. 


liierarchy,  but  to  an  association  of  laymen,"  and  declared  that 
this  was  a  violation  of  the  principle  on  which  rested  the 
Church  which  "  was  founded  by  Jesus  Christ." 

The  Pope's  decision  was  final  and  decisive  for  all  Catholics. 
It  was  based  on  fundamentals.  No  change  in  details  could 
alter  it.  The  bishops  who  had  been  willing  to  try  the  new 
law  acquiesced  in  its  condemnation.  What  would  Parlia- 
ment do  about  it.?  The  year  was  running  out.  Would 
the  churches  be  closed.''  If  so,  would  not  France  be  drawn 
into  a  lamentable  religious  war,  the  outcome  of  which  no  one 
could  foretell  .f*  The  Government  was  determined  to  avoid 
that  contingency.  The  Minister  of  Public  Worship,  Briand, 
decided  to  apply  to  the  situation  a  law  passed  in  1881  regu- 
lating the  holding  of  public  meetings.  Designed  for  secular 
meetings,  there  was  nothing  to  prevent  its  being  applied  to 
religious.  It  was  therefore  announced  that  priests  might 
make  use  of  the  churches  after  merely  filing  the  usual  appli- 
cation, which  should  cover  a  whole  year.  This  compromise 
also  was  rejected  by  the  Pope. 

Parliament  therefore  passed  a  new  law,  promulgated 
January  2,  1907.  By  it  most  of  the  privileges  guaranteed 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  by  the  Law  of  1905  were  abro- 
gated. The  critical  point  was  the  keeping  of  the  churches 
open  for  public  worship.  It  was  provided  that  their  use 
should  be  gratuitous,  and  should  be  regulated  by  contracts 
between  the  priests  and  the  prefects  or  mayors.  These 
contracts  would  safeguard  the  civil  ownership  of  the  build- 
ings, but  worship  would  go  on  in  them  as  before.  This 
system  appears  to  be  gradually  gaining  lodgment  in  the  life 
of  France. 

The  result  of  this  series  of  events  and  measures  is  this. 
Church  and  State  are  definitively  separated.  The  people  have 
apparently  approved  in  recent  elections  the  policy  followed 
by  their  Government.  Bishops  and  priests  no  longer  receive 
salaries  from  the  State.  On  the  other  hand  they  have  liber- 
ties which  they  did  not  enjoy  under  the  Concordat,  such  as 


SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE     371 

rights  of  assembly  and  freedom  from  governmental  par- 
ticipation in  appointments.  The  faithful  must  henceforth 
support  their  priests,  and  bear  the  expenses  of  the  Church. 
Whether  private  contributions  will  prove  sufficient  remains 
to  be  seen.  The  churches  have  been  left  them  by  this  prac- 
tical but  irrational  device.  Other  ecclesiastical  buildings, 
such  as  the  palaces  of  bishops,  the  rectories  of  priests,  and 
the  edifices  of  theological  seminaries,  have  been  taken  from 
ecclesiastical  control,  and  are  now  used  for  educational  or 
charitable  purposes,  or  as  government  offices.  The  former 
palace  of  the  Archbishop  of  Paris  is  at  present  occupied  by 
the  Minister  of  Labor.  The  famous  seminary  of  St.  Sulpice 
is  now  used  in  connection  with  the  Luxembourg  Museum. 

ACQUISITION  OF  COLONIES  IN  THE  NINETEENTH 
CENTURY 

France,  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  had  ^^^  French 
possessed  an  extensive  colonial  empire.  This  she  had  lost  to  gjj,_jj.g 
England  as  a  result  of  the  wars  of  the  reign  of  Louis  XV, 
the  Revolution,  and  the  Napoleonic  period,  and  in  1815 
her  possessions  had  shrunk  to  a  few  small  points,  Guadaloupe 
and  INIartinique  in  the  West  Indies,  St.  Pierre  and  Miquelon, 
off  Newfoundland,  five  towns  on  the  coasts  of  India,  of 
which  Pondicherry  was  the  best  known,  Bourbon,  now  called 
Reunion,  an  island  in  the  Indian  Ocean,  Guiana  in  South 
America,  which  had  few  inhabitants,  and  Senegal  in  Africa. 
These  were  simply  melancholy  souvenirs  of  her  once  proud 
past,  rags  and  tatters  of  a  once  imposing  empire. 

In  the  nineteenth  century  she  was  destined  to  begin  again, 
and  to  create  an  empire  of  vast  geographical  extent,  only 
second  in  importance  to  that  of  Great  Britain,  though  vastly 

^  See  the  admirable  and  detailed  article  by  Professor  Othon  Guerlac 
in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  June  1908,  entitled,  "  Church  and  State 
in  France."  The  best  and  fullest  account  of  this  subject  is  to  be  found 
in  Debidour,  L'6glise  catholique  et  I'etat  sous  la  troisi^me  rdpublique 
Vol.  II,  231-498.    Most  of  the  important  documents  are  appended. 


372      FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

inferior  to  that.  The  interest  in  conquests  revived  but  slowly 
after  1815.  France  had  conquered  so  much  in  Europe  from 
1792  to  1812  only  to  lose  it  as  she  had  lost  her  colonies,  that 
conquest  in  any  form  seemed  but  a  futile  and  costly  display 
of  misdirected  enterprise.  Nevertheless,  in  time  the  process 
began  anew,  and  each  of  the  various  regimes  which  have  suc- 
ceeded one  another  since  1815  has  contributed  to  the  build- 
ing of  the  new  empire. 
Algeria.  The  beginning  was  made  in  Algeria,  on  the  northern  coast 

of  Africa,  directly  opposite  France,  and  reached  now  in  less 
than  twenty-four  hours  from  Marseilles.  Algeria  was  nom- 
inally a  part  of  the  Turkish  Empire,  but  the  power  of  the 
Sultan  was  insignificant.  A  native  Dey  was  the  real  ruler. 
The  population  consisted  of  Arabs,  a  nomadic  and  pastoral 
people,  descendants  of  the  Arabian  conquerors  of  the  sev- 
enth century,  and  of  Berbers,  an  agricultural  people,  de- 
scendants of  the  natives  who,  more  than  twenty  centuries 
before,  had  fought  the  Carthaginians.  All  the  people  were 
Mohammedans.     The  capital  was  an  important  town,  Algiers. 

Down  to  the  opening  of  the  nineteenth  century  Algeria, 
Tunis,  and  Tripoli,  nominally  parts  of  the  Ottoman  Empire, 
were  in  reality  independent,  and  constituted  the  Barbary 
States,  whose  main  business  was  piracy.  But  Europe  was 
no  longer  disposed  to  see  her  wealth  seized  and  her  citizens 
enslaved  until  she  paid  their  ransom.  In  1816  an  English 
fleet  bombarded  Algiers,  released  no  less  than  3,000  Chris- 
tian captives,  and  destroyed  piracy. 

The  French  conquest  of  Algeria  grew  out  of  a  dispute 
concerning  a  loan  made  by  the  Dey  to  the  Directory  in  1797. 
This  dispute  ended  in  insults  by  the  Dey  to  France,  with 
the  result  that  in  1830  the  latter  power  sent  a  fleet  of  a 
hundred  ships,  and  five  hundred  transports  across  the 
Mediterranean,  and  seized  the  capital.  France  had  not  in- 
tended the  conquest  of  the  whole  country,  only  the  punish- 
ment of  an  insolent  Dey,  but  attacks  being  made  upon  her 
from  time  to  time,  which  she  felt  she  must  crush,  she  was 


ACQUISITION  OF  COLONIES  373 

led  on,  step  hy  step,  until  she  had  everywhere  established 
her  power.  All  through  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe  this 
process  was  going  on.  Its  chief  feature  was  an  intermittent 
struggle  of  fourteen  years  with  a  native  leader,  Abd-el-Kader, 
who  proclaimed  and  fouglit  a  Holy  War  against  the  in- 
truder. In  the  end  (1847)  he  was  forced  to  surrender,  and 
France  had  added  what  is  still  her  most  important  colony. 
This  is  also  another  episode  in  the  dismemberment  of  the 
Turkish  Empire,  whose  disintegration  in  Europe,  in  the 
Balkan  peninsula,  is  elsewhere  described. 

Under  Napoleon  III,  the  beginning  of  conquest  in  another  Other 

part  of  Africa  was  made.     France  had  possessed,  since  the      "^an 

.  .  .         .  '11  conquests, 

time  of  Louis  XIII  and  Richelieu,  one  or  two  miserable  ports 

on  the  western  coast,  St.  Louis  the  most  important.  Under 
Napoleon  III,  the  annexation  of  the  Senegal  valley  was 
largely  carried  througli  by  the  efforts  of  the  governor, 
Faidherbe,  who  later  distinguished  himself  in  the  Franco- 
German  war.  Under  Napoleon  III  also,  a  beginning 
was  made  in  another  part  of  the  world,  in  Asia.  The  perse- 
cution of  Christian  natives,  and  the  murder  of  certain  French 
missionaries  gave  Napoleon  the  pretext  to  attack  the  king 
of  Annam,  whose  kingdom  was  in  the  peninsula  that  juts 
out  from  southeastern  Asia.  After  eight  years  of  inter- 
mittent fighting  France  acquired  from  the  king  the  whole 
of  Cochin-China  (1858-67),  and  also  established  a  pro-  Cochin- 
tectorate    over   the   kingdom   of   Cambodia,    directly   north.  China. 

Thus,  by  1870,  France  had  staked  out  an  empire  of  about 
700,000  square  kilometers,  containing  a  population  of  about 
six   million. 

Under  the  present  Republic  the  work  of  expansion   and  Expansion 
consolidation  has  been  carried  much  further  than  under  all  mj^j  ^ 
of  the  preceding  regimes.     There  have  been  extensive  annex-  Republic, 
ations  in  northern  Africa,  western  Africa,  the  Indian  Ocean, 
and  in  Indo-China. 

In  northern  Africa,  Tunis  has  passed  under  the  control 
of  France.     This  was  one  of  the  Barbary  states,  and  was 


374.   FRANCE  UNDER  THE  THIRD  REPUBLIC 

nominally  a  part  of  the  Turkish  Empire,  with  a  Bey  as 
sovereign.  After  establishing  herself  in  Algeria,  France 
desired  to  extend  her  influence  eastward,  over  this  neigh- 
boring state.  But  Italy,  now  united,  began  about  1870 
to  entertain  a  similar  ambition.  France,  therefore,  under 
the  ministry  of  Jules  Ferry,  an  ardent  believer  in  colonial 
expansion,  sent  troops  into  Tunis  in  1881,  which  forced  the 
Bey  to  accept  a  French  protectorate  over  his  state.  The 
French  have  not  annexed  Tunis  formally,  but  they  control  it 
absolutely  through  a  Resident  at  the  court  of  the  Bey,  whose 
advice  the  latter  is  practically  obliged  to   follow. 

Western  In   western   Africa,   France   has   made   extensive    annexa- 

"^^*  tions  in  the  Senegal,  Guinea,  Dahomey,  the  Ivory  coast,  and 

the  region  of  the  Niger,  and  north  of  the  Congo.  By 
occupying  the  oases  in  the  Sahara  she  has  established  her 
claims  to  that  vast  but  hitherto  unproductive  area.  This 
process  has  covered  many  years  of  the  present  Republic. 
The  result  is  the  existence  of  French  authority  over  most 
of  northwest  Africa,  from  Algeria  on  the  Mediterranean, 
to  the  Congo  river.  This  region  south  of  Algeria  is  called  the 
French  Soudan,  and  comprises  an  area  seven  or  eight  times 
as  large  as  France,  with  a  population  of  some  fourteen 
millions,  mainly  blacks.  There  is  some  discussion  of  a  Trans- 
Saharan  railroad  to  bind  these  African  possessions  more 
closely  together. 

In  Asia,  the  Republic  has  imposed  her  protectorate  over 
the  kingdom  of  Annam  (1883)  and  has  annexed  Tonkin, 
taken  from  China  after  considerable  fighting   (1885).     In 

Madagascar,  the  Indian  Ocean,  she  has  conquered  Madagascar,  an 
island  larger  than  France  herself,  with  a  population  of  two 
and  a  half  million.  A  protectorate  was  imposed  upon  that 
country  in  1895,  after  ten  years  of  disturbance,  but  after 
quelling  a  rebellion  that  broke  out  the  following  year,  the 
protectorate  was  abolished,  and  the  island  was  made  a 
French  colony. 

Thus,  at  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century,  the  empire 


EXTENT  OF  FRENCH  COLONIAL  EMPIRE       375 

of  France  is  eleven  times  larger  than  France  itself,  has  an 
area  of  six  million  square  kilometers,  and  a  population  of 
about  fifty  millions,  and  a  rapidly  growing  commerce.  Most 
of  this  empire  is  located  in  the  tropics,  and  is  ill  adapted  to 
the  settlement  of  Europeans.  Algeria  and  Tunis,  however, 
offer  conditions  favorable  for  such  settlements.  They  con- 
stitute the  most  valuable  French  possessions. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 

The  Kingdom  of  Italy,  as  we  have  seen,  was  established 
in  1859  and  I860.  Venetia  was  acquired  in  1866,  and  Rome 
in  1870.  In  these  cases,  as  in  the  preceding,  the  people 
were  allowed  to  express  their  wishes  by  a  vote,  which,  in 
both  instances,  was  nearly  unanimous  in  favor  of  the  annexa- 
tion; in  the  former  case  by  about  647,000  votes  to  60;  in 
the  latter  by  about  130,000  to  1,500. 
Difficulties  The  new  kingdom  had  to  face  problems  of  the  gravest 

confronting  ^^.^^  most  varied  character,  problems  which  the  struggle 
kingdom  ^^^'  ^^^^^J'  ^°  absorbing,  had  obscured,  but  which  now  ap- 
peared in  all  their  saliency.  Political  unity  had  been  gained, 
but  not  moral  unity.  "  We  have  united  Italy,"  said 
D'Azeglio  in  1861,  "  now  let  us  unite  Italians,"  by  which 
was  meant  that  peoples  differing  in  their  historical  evolution, 
in  their  institutions,  in  their  economic  life,  in  their  tempera- 
ments, and  which  had  for  centuries  regarded  each  other  with 
indifference  or  animosity,  must  be  made  to  feel  that  they  were 
one.  These  peoples  had  never  been  united  since  the  fall 
of  Rome,  and  Venetians,  Sicilians,  Tuscans,  Romans,  Pied- 
montese,  differed  profoundly.  The  contrast  was  sharpest 
between  the  north  and  the  south.  They  were  like  two  differ- 
ent countries.  "  To  harmonize  north  and  south,"  said 
Cavour,  "  is  harder  than  fighting  with  Austria  or  struggling 
with  Rome."  A  fusion  of  such  dissimilar  elements  could 
only  be  slowly  achieved,  and  must  be  the  result  of  many 
forces.  But  it  must  imperatively  be  the  first  object  of 
Italian  statesmen  to  create  a  common  patriotism,  and  mutual 
interests. 

376 


DIVERSE  ELEMENTS  IN  THE  KINGDOM        377 

Since  1815  there  had  been  several  states,  each  with  its 
own  government,  its  own  diplomatic  corps,  its  own  courts, 
system  of  taxation,  its  own  tariff,  and  coinage.  This  variety 
could  not  be  preserved  in  the  new  kingdom,  which  was  not  a 
federal  state,  like  Germany,  but  a  single  government,  unitary. 
Only  one  section  had  had  training  in  parliamentary  govern- 
ment. Piedmont,  and  that  only  since  184<8.      The  others  had  Piedmont 

been  under  despotisms,  severe  as  in  Naples,  enlightened  as  in  ^.lone 

RccustoTiicd 
Tuscany.     Piedmont  had   accomplished  the  great  work   of  ^^  constitu- 

unification,   yet   it   was    not,   like   Prussia,   larger   than    all  tional  gov- 

the  other  states  combined,  but  was  a  mere  fraction  of  four  ernment. 

or  five  millions  out  of  twenty-two  or  more.     It  could  not, 

therefore,  impose  its  will  upon  the  others  as  Prussia  could 

upon  Germany.     Could  elements  so  dissimilar,  men  so  little 

likely   to   understand   each   other's   point   of   view,   so  little 

dominated   by   the    same   ideals,   work    together   effectively? 

Might  they  not  tear  down  the  whole  edifice,  the  mere  shell 

of  which  had  been  so  painfully  erected?     Now  that  Italy 

was  united,  it  must  be  thoroughly  transformed  that  it  might 

continue.     "  Unify  to  improve,"  said  Cavour,  "  improve  to 

consolidate."     A  work  of  organization,  so  vast  and  varied, 

would  need,  not  years,  but  generations.     In  1870,  after  the 

fall  of  Rome,  Victor  Emmanuel  showed  that  he  understood 

the  situation.     "  Italy  is  united  and  free ;  it  remains  for  us 

henceforth  to  make  her  great  and  happy."     This  was  the 

programme  of  the  Government. 

This  work,  begun  in  1861,  has  continued  ever  since, 
marked  by  notable  achievements,  by  distressing  failures, 
but,  on  the  whole,  by  distinct  and  great  progress.  Only 
certain  features  of  the  later  story  can  be  indicated  here. 

The  work  of  construction  was  undertaken  earnestly.  In 
1861  the  Constitution  of  Piedmont  was  adopted,  with  slight 
variations,  as  the  Constitution  of  Italy.  There  was  to  be  a  The  Con- 
parliament  of  two  chambers,  a  Senate  and  a  Chamber  of 
Deputies.  The  suffrage  for  the  latter  was  to  be  the  same 
as  it  had  been  for  the  Lower  House  in  Piedmont.     The  full 


378 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


The 

question 
of  the 
Papacy. 


parliamentary  system  was  introduced,  ministers  representing 
the  \yill  of  the  Lower  Chamber  and  controlled  by  it,  legisla- 
tion enacted  by  the  two  Houses.  The  first  capital  was  Turin, 
then  Florence  in  1865,  and  finally  Rome  since  1871.  The 
kingdom  w^as  divided  for  administrative  purposes  into  fifty- 
nine  districts,  resembling  the  French  departments,  which  were 
increased  to  sixty-nine  after  the  annexation  of  Venetia  and 
Rome.  This  broke  up  the  old  provincial  lines,  centralized  the 
state,  by  giving  the  appointment  of  all  prefects  and  mayors 
of  cities  to  the  national  government,  tended  to  destroy  the 
spirit  of  local  individuality,  and  to  exalt  Italy  and  Italian 
patriotism. 

The  most  perplexing  question  confronting  the  new  king- 
dom concerned  its  relations  to  the  Papacy.  The  Italian 
Kingdom  had  seized,  by  violence,  the  city  of  Rome,  over 
which  the  Popes  had  ruled  in  uncontested  right  for  a 
thousand  years.  Rome  had  this  peculiarity  over  all  other 
cities,  that  it  was  the  capital  of  Catholics  the  world  over. 
Any  attempt  to  expel  the  Pope  from  the  city  or  to  subject 
him  to  the  House  of  Savoy  would  everywhere  arouse  the  faith- 
ful, already  clamorous,  and  might  cause  an  intervention 
in  behalf  of  the  restoration  of  the  temporal  power.  There 
were  henceforth  to  be  two  sovereigns,  one  temporal,  one 
spiritual,  within  the  same  city.  The  situation  was  absolutely 
unique  and  extremely  delicate.  It  was  considered  necessary 
to  determine  their  relations  before  the  government  was  trans- 
ferred to  Rome.  It  was  impossible  to  reach  any  agreement 
with  the  Pope,  as  he  refused  to  recognize  the  Kingdom  of 
Italy,  but  spoke  of  Victor  Emmanuel  simply  as  the  King  of 
Sardinia,  and  would  make  no  concessions  in  regard  to  his  own 
The  law  of  rights  in  Rome.  Parliament,  therefore,  passed  in  Florence, 
Papal  Guar-  jyjay  13,  1871,  the  Law  of  Papal  Guarantees,  a  remarkable 

£LILli66S 

act  defining  the  relations  of  Church  and  State  in  Italy. 

The  object  of  this  law  was  to  carry  out  Cavour's  prin- 
ciple of  a  "  free  Church  in  a  free  State,"  to  reassure  Catholics 
that  the  new   kingdom  had   no   intention   of  controlling  in 


THE  LAW  OF  PAPAL  GUARANTEES        379 

any  way  the  spiritual  activities  of  the  Pope,  though  taking 
from  him  his  temporal  powers.  Catliolics  must  feel  that  the 
Pope  was  no  creature  of  the  Italian  government,  but  had 
entire  liberty  of  action  in  governing  the  Church.  Conse- 
quently his  person  is  declared  sacred  and  inviolable.  Any 
attacks  upon  him  are,  by  this  law,  to  be  punished  exactly  as 
are  similar  attacks  upon  the  King.  He  has  his  own  diplo- 
matic corps,  and  receives  diplomatic  representatives  from 
other  countries.  He  has  his  court,  the  Curia  Romana,  as  the  The  Curia 
King  has  his.  That  he  may  communicate  with  the  outside  ^^omana. 
world  directly,  and  not  through  agencies  controlled  by  the 
Kingdom,  he  has  his  own  independent  postal  and  telegraph 
service.  Certain  places  are  set  apart  as  entirely  under 
his  sovereignty :  the  Vatican,  the  Lateran,  Castel  Gan- 
dolfo,  and  their  gardens.  Here  no  Italian  official  may  en- 
ter, in  his  official  capacity,  for  Italian  law  and  admin- 
istration stop  outside  these  limits.  A  similar  exemption 
holds  wherever  a  conclave  or  a  church  council  is  held.  In 
return  for  the  income  lost  with  the  temporal  power,  the 
Pope  is  granted  3,225,000  francs  a  year  by  the  Italian 
Kingdom.  This  law  has  been  faithfully  observed  by  the 
Italian  government.  But  neither  Pius  IX,  nor  Leo  XIII,  nor 
Pius  X  has  been  willing  to  accept  it.     The  Pope  considers 

himself  the  "prisoner  of  the  Vatican,"  and  since  1870  has  not  '^^^ 

*'  T)risoii6T 
left  it  to  go  into  the  streets  of  Rome,  as  he  would  thereby  be  ^^  ^j^^ 

tacitly  recognizing  the  existence  of  another  ruler  there,  the  Vatican." 
"  usurper."  The  Pope  has  never  accepted  the  annuity.  He 
has  even  forbidden  Catholics  to  vote  in  national  elections, 
or  to  accept  national  offices,  as  that  would  be  a  recognition 
that  an  Italian  nation  exists.  They  may  vote  in  municipal 
elections.    Municipalities  existed  long  before  the  Kingdom. 

The  Pope  has  never  recognized  the  existence  of  the  king- 
dom, and  the  solution  of  the  question  of  the  relations  of  the 
Church  and  the  State  seems  as  remote  as  ever.  The  state- 
ment of  Victor  Emmanuel  on  entering  the  city  as  sovereign, 
July  2,  1871,  still  describes  the  situation.     "  Yes,  we  are 


S80 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Death  of 
Victor  Em- 
manuel  II. 


The  edu- 
cational 
problem. 


in  Rome,  and  we  shall  remain."  The  Italian  Government 
has  never  feared  the  Pope,  but  it  did  for  several  years  fear 
an  intervention  of  Catholic  powers,  a  danger  which,  with 
the  lapse  of  time,  has  practically  disappeared. 

Another  difficult  problem  for  the  Kingdom  was  its  financial 
status.  The  debts  of  the  different  states  were  assumed  by  it 
and  were  large.  The  nation  was  also  obliged  to  make  large 
expenditures  on  the  army  and  the  navy,  on  fortifications, 
and  on  public  works,  particularly  on  the  building  of  rail- 
ways, which  were  essential  to  the  economic  prosperity  of 
the  country  as  well  as  conducive  to  the  strengthening  of 
the  sense  of  common  nationality.  There  were,  for  several 
years,  large  annual  deficits,  necessitating  new  loans,  which, 
of  course,  augmented  the  public  debt.  Heroically  did  suc- 
cessive ministers  seek  to  make  both  ends  meet,  not  shrinking 
from  new  and  unpopular  taxes,  or  from  the  seizure  and  sale 
of  monastic  lands.  Success  was  finally  achieved,  and  in 
1879   the   receipts   exceeded  the   expenditures. 

In  1878  Victor  Emmanuel  II  died  and  was  buried  in  the 
Pantheon,  one  of  the  few  ancient  buildings  of  Rome.  Over 
his  tomb  is  the  inscription,  "  To  the  Father  of  his  Country." 
He  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Humbert  I,  then  thirty-four 
years  of  age.  A  month  later  Pius  IX  died,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Leo  XIII,  at  the  time  of  his  election  sixty-eight 
years  of  age.  But  nothing  was  changed  by  this  change  of 
personalities.  Each  maintained  the  system  of  his  predecessor. 
Leo  XIII,  Pope  from  1878  to  1903,  following  the  precedent 
set  by  Pius  IX,  never  recognized  the  Kingdom  of  Italy,  nor 
did  he  ever  leave  the  Vatican.  He,  too,  considered  himself  a 
prisoner  of  the  "  robber  king." 

Another  urgent  problem  confronting  the  new  kingdom 
was  that  of  the  education  of  its  citizens.  This  was  most 
imperative  if  the  masses  of  the  people  were  to  be  fitted  for 
the  freer  and  more  responsible  life  opened  by  the  political 
revolution.  The  preceding  governments  had  grossly  neg- 
lected tliis   duty.     In   1861   over   seventy-five  per   cent,  of 


EDUCATIONAL  REFORMS  381 

tlic  population  of  the  Kingdom  were  illiterate.  In  Naples 
and  Sicily,  the  most  backward  in  development  of  all  the 
sections  of  Italy,  the  number  of  illiterates  exceeded  ninety 
per  cent,  of  the  population ;  and  in  Piedmont  and  Lom- 
bardy,  the  most  advanced  sections,  one-third  of  the  men 
and  more  than  half  of  the  women  could  neither  read  nor 
write.  "  Without  national  education  there  exists  morally 
no  n'ation,"  Mazzini  had  said.  "  The  national  conscience 
cannot  be  awakened  except  by  its  aid.  Without  national 
education,  common  to  all  citizens,  the  equality  of  civic 
duties  and  rights   is   an  empty  formula." 

In  1877  a  compulsory  education  law  was  passed.  This 
was  extended  by  a  new  law  passed  in  1904.  But  as  the 
support  of  primary  schools  rests  with  the  communes,  and 
as,  in  many  cases,  they  have  evaded  their  responsibility,  the 
system  of  universal  education  has  not  been  established  in 
practice.  Italy  has  done  much  during  the  last  thirty  years, 
but  much  remains  to  be  done.  Illiteracy,  though  diminish- 
ing, is  still  widely  prevalent.  Recent  statistics  show  that 
forty  per  cent,  of  the  recruits  in  the  army  are  illiterate. 
Satisfactory  results  will  probably  not  be  obtained  until  the 
Government  itself  assumes  the  support  and  direction  of  the 
schools  instead  of  leaving  them  in  the  hands  of  the  local 
authorities. 

In   1882   an  electoral   reform,  which  had  long  been   dis-  Extension 

cussed,  was  passed.     Hitherto  the  suffrage  had  been  lim-  °  ^  ^ 

^  °  suffrage. 

ited  to  property-holders  twenty-five  years  of  age  and  older, 
paying  an  annual  tax  of  at  least  forty  lire.  Under  this 
system  less  than  two  and  a  half  per  cent,  of  the  population 
possessed  the  right  to  vote.  So  widespread  was  illiteracy 
that  it  was  not  considered  wise  to  proclaim  universal  suffrage. 
The  property  qualification  was  now  reduced  from  forty 
hre  to  nineteen  lire  eighty  centesimi,  and  the  age  quali- 
fication was  lowered  to  twenty-one,  and  an  additional  method 
of  securing  the  franchise  was  also  established,  namely  an 
educational  qualification.     All  men  of  twenty-one  who  have 


S8S 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


The    Triple 
Alliance, 


Francesco 
Crispi. 


Amtitious 
military 
and  colonial 
policy. 


had  a  primary  school  education  were  given  the  franchise. 
This  reform  more  than  tripled  the  number  of  voters  at 
once,  from  627,838  to  2,049,461.  Of  these  about  two- 
thirds  secured  the  right  through  meeting  the  educational 
qualification.  While,  therefore,  the  suffrage  is  not  universal 
it  tends  to  become  so  with  the  spread  of  elementary  education. 

This  period  of  internal  reforms  was  interrupted  by  foreign 
politics.  In  1882  Italy  entered  the  alliance  with  Germany 
and  Austria.  The  reasons  were  various :  pique  at  France, 
dread  of  intervention  in  behalf  of  the  Pope,  and  a  desire 
to  appear  as  one  of  the  great  powers  of  Europe.  The 
result  was  that  she  was  forced  to  spend  larger  sums  upon 
her  army,  remodeled  along  Prussian  lines,  and  her  navy, 
thus  disturbing  her  finances  once  more. 

Italy  now  embarked  upon  another  expensive  and  hazard- 
ous entei*prise,  the  acquisition  of  colonies,  influenced  in  this 
direction  by  the  prevalent  fashion,  and  by  a  desire  to  rank 
among  the  world  powers.  Shut  out  of  Tunis,  her  natural 
field,  by  France,  she,  in  1885,  seized  positions  on  the  Red 
Sea,  particularly  the  port  of  Massawa.  Two  years  later 
she  consequently  found  herself  at  war  with  Abyssinia.  The 
minister  who  had  inaugurated  this  movement,  Depretis,  died 
in  1887.  He  was  succeeded  by  Crispi,  one  of  the  few 
striking  personalities  Italian  politics  have  produced  since  the 
time  of  Cavour.  Crispi  threw  himself  heartily  into  the 
colonial  scheme,  extended  the  claims  of  Italy  in  East  Africa, 
and  tried  to  play  off  one  native  leader  against  another. 
To  the  new  colony  he  gave  the  name  of  Eritrea.  At  the 
same  time  an  Italian  protectorate  was  established  over  a 
region  in  eastern  Africa  called  Somaliland.  But  all  this 
involved  long  and  expensive  campaigns  against  the  natives. 
Italy  was  trying  to  play  the  role  of  a  great  power  when 
her  resources  did  not  warrant  it.  The  consequence  of  this 
aggressive  and  ambitious  military,  naval,  and  colonial  policy 
was  the  creation  again  of  a  deficit  in  the  state's  finances, 
which   increased    alarmingly.     The   deficits    of   four   years, 


COLONIAL  POLICY  383 

ending  January  1,  1891,  amounted  to  the  enormous  sum  of 
over  seventy-five  million  dollars.     To  meet  the  situation  new 
taxes  had  to  be  imposed  upon  a  people  already  heavily  over- 
burdened.    The  reaction  of  this  upon  internal  politics  was 
disastrous.     The  resultant  economic  distress  expressed  itself  The 
in  deep  dissatisfaction  with  the  monarchy,  and  in  the  growth  resultant 
of   republican   and   socialistic   parties.     Riots   broke   out  in 
1889  in  Turin,  Milan,  Rome,  and  in  the  southern  province 
of  Apulia.     Crispi  adopted  a  policy  of  stem  repression,  which  Policy  of 
restored  quiet  on  the  surface,  but  left  a  widespread  feeling  '^^P'^ession. 
of  rancor  behind.     He  fell  from  office  in  1891,  but,  his  suc- 
cessor being  unable  to  improve  the  financial  situation   and 
the  internal  conditions  of  the  country,  he  came  back  into 
power  in  1893  and  ruled  practically  as  a  dictator  until  1896. 
His  policy  was  the  same  as  before,  vigorous  repression  of 
all  opposition  to  the  existing  system.     He  made  no  attempt 
to  remove  the  causes  of  discontent. 

But  Crispi  only  gave  fuller  range  to  his  excessive  ambi- 
tions in  the  colonial  field.  Extending  the  field  of  occupation 
in  East  Africa  he  aroused  the  bitter  opposition  of  Menelek,  War  with 
ruler  of  Abyssinia.  The  result  was  disastrous.  The  Italian  Abyssinia, 
army  of  14,000  under  Baratieri,  was  overwhelmed  in  1896 
by  Menelek  with  80,000,  no  less  than  6,000  of  the  Italian 
troops  perishing.  This  crushing  defeat  sealed  the  doom  of 
Crispi,  who  immediately  resigned.  The  Marquis  di  Rudini 
became  prime  minister  and  attempted  a  policy  of  pacifica- 
tion. Italy  renounced  her  extreme  claims,  restricted  her 
colonial  area,  and  secured  the  release  of  the  soldiers  who 
were  prisoners  of  war  in  the  hands  of  Menelek.  The  re- 
pressive policy  at  home  was  abandoned,  and  an  attempt  was 
made  to  investigate  the  causes  of  discontent.  But  this 
policy  was  suddenly  cut  short  by  formidable  and  sanguinary 
riots  that  broke  out  in  various  parts  of  Italy  In  May  1898. 
The  movement  was  general,  though  most  bloody  in  Milan. 
Its  cause  was  the  wretchedness  of  the  people,  which  in  turn 
was  largely  occasioned  by  the  heavy  taxation  resulting  from 


tion   of 
Humbert  I 


384  THE  KINGDOiAI  OF  ITALY 

these  unwise  attempts  to  play  an  international  role  hope- 
lessly out  of  proportion  to  the  country's  resources.  In  the 
south  and  center  the  movement  took  the  form  of  "  bread 
riots,"  but  in  the  north  it  was  distinctly  revolutionary. 
"  Down  with  the  dynasty,"  was  a  cry  heard  there.  All  these 
movements  were  suppressed  by  the  Government,  but  only 
after  much  bloodshed.  They  indicated  widespread  distress 
and  dissatisfaction  Avith  existing  conditions. 

Assassina-  Jn   July    1900,   King   Humbert   was    assassinated   by    an 

Italian  anarchist  who  went  to  Italy  for  that  purpose  from 
Paterson,  New  Jersey.  Humbert  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
^"ictor  Emmanuel  HI,  then  in  his  thirty-first  year. 

Victor  Em-  'pj^g  j^e^y  King  had  been  carefully  educated  and  soon 
*  showed  that  he  was  a  man  of  intelligence,  of  energy,  and  of 
firmness  of  will.  He  won  the  favor  of  his  subjects  by  the 
simplicity  of  his  mode  of  life,  by  his  evident  sense  of  duty, 
and  by  his  sincere  interest  in  the  welfare  of  the  people,  shown 
in  many  spontaneous  and  unconventional  ways.  He  became 
forthwith  a  more  decisive  factor  in  the  government  than 
his  father  had  been.  He  was  a  democratic  monarch,  in- 
different to  display,  laborious,  vigorous.  The  opening  decade 
of  the  twentieth  century  was  characterized  by  a  new  spirit 
which,  in  a  way,  reflected  the  buoyancy,  and  hopefulness,  and 
courage  of  the  young  King.  But  the  causes  of  the  new 
optimism  were  deeper  than  the  mere  change  of  rulers  and 
lay  in  the  growing  prosperity  of  the  nation,  a  prosperity, 
which,  despite  appearances,  had  been  for  some  years  pre- 
paring and  which  was  now  witnessed  on  all  sides.  The  worst 
was  evidently  over.  The  national  finances  were  being  con- 
servatively managed.  Since  1897  the  receipts  have  con- 
stantly been  larger  than  the  expenses.  Between  1901  and 
1907  the  surpluses  were  successively  thirty-two,  sixty-nine, 
tliirty-three,  forty-seven,  sixty-three,  and  one  hundred  and 
one,  million  lire.  This  situation,  so  highly  creditable,  was 
brought  about  by  strict  economy  and  by  heavy  taxation. 
The  market  price  of  the  five  per  cent,  bonds,  which  had  fallen 


INDUSTRIAL  EXPANSION  385 

as  low  as  seventy-two  in  1894,  rose  to  par  and  above  par.  A 
beginning  was  also  made  in  the  imperative  work  of  reducing 
taxes  and  of  shifting  somewhat  their  incidence,  which  was 
grossly  unjust  to  the  poorer  classes. 

These  facts  were  full  of  encouragement,  but  they  repre-  Industrial 
sented  an  effect  as  well  as  a  cause.  Behind  a  flourishing  expansion, 
budget  stood  an  expanding  economic  activity.  Italy  was 
becoming  an  industrial  nation.  This  is  the  vital  fact  in 
the  situation  to-day.  Metallurgy  has  made  such  progress 
in  recent  years  that  in  the  two  lines  of  naval  and  railway 
construction  Italy  is  no  longer  dependent  upon  foreign 
countries.  The  development  of  these  two  industries  has  given 
a  powerful  impulse  to  activity  in  other  directions.  The  silk 
and  cotton  and  chemical  manufactures  have  rapidly  ad- 
vanced.    The  merchant  marine  has  greatly  increased. 

More  remarkable  than  the  progress  made  in  the  last  twenty 
years,  and  more  engaging  the  public  attention,  is  the  progress 
that  seems  destined  in  the  future,  and  for  this  reason :  industry 
depended,  up  to  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century,  upon 
steam  and  steam  depends  upon  coal.  Italy  is  at  a  great 
disadvantage  compared  with  other  countries  because  she  lacks 
the  two  indispensable  elements — coal  and  iron — which  she 
is  therefore  obliged  to  import.  This  is  a  tremendous  handi- 
cap. But  the  last  two  decades  of  the  century  revealed  to 
the  world  the  possibility  of  the  use  of  electricity  as  a  source 
of  energy  for  industrial  pursuits.  From  electricity,  "  white 
coal,"  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  Italy  expects  her  transforma-  Advent  of 
tion  into  a  great  industrial  power  for,  while  Nature  has  re- 
fused  her  coal,  she  has  given  her  immense  water  power  in  the 
streams  which  flow  rapidly  from  the  Alps  and  Apennines. 
It  has  been  estimated  that  the  amount  of  energy  she  can 
draw  from  this  source  will  be  from  three  to  five  million  horse- 
power. The  motive  power  used  in  the  manufacturing  estab- 
lishments of  the  United  States  in  1900  was,  according  to 
the  census  report,  eleven  million,  three  hundred  thousand 
horse-power.     It  is  appropriate  that  the  land  of  Volta  and 


386 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  ITALY 


Increase 
of  the 
population 


Galvani  should  sec  her  future  in  the  new  agency  which  is 
already  profoundly  altering  the  conditions  of  modern  in- 
dustry and  which  her  mountain  streams  will  furnish  her  so 
abundantly. 

This  transformation  into  a  great  industrial  state  is  not 
only  possible  but  is  necessary,  owing  to  her  rapidly  increasing 
population,  which  has  grown,  since  1870,  from  about  25,- 
000,000  to  nearly  35,000,000.  The  birth  rate  is  higher  than 
that  of  any  other  country  of  Europe.  But  during  the  same 
period  the  emigration  from  Italy  has  been  large  and  has 
steadily  increased.  Official  statistics  show  that,  between  1876 
and  1905,  over  eight  million  persons  emigrated,  of  whom 
over  four  million  went  to  various  South  American  countries, 
especially  Argentina,  and  to  the  United  States.  Perhaps 
half  of  the  total  number  have  returned  to  their  native  land, 
for  much  of  the  emigration  is  of  a  temporary  character. 
Emigration  has  increased  greatly  under  the  present  reign, 
while  the  economic  conditions  of  the  country  have  begun 
to  show  improvement.  This  is  explained  by  the  fact  that 
the  industrial  revival  described  above  has  not  yet  affected 
southern  Italy  and  Sicily,  whence  the  large  proportion  of 
the  emigrants  come.  From  those  parts  which  have  experi- 
enced that  revival  the  emigration  is  not  large.  Only  by  an 
Problem  of  extensive  growth  of  industries  can  this  emigration  be  stopped 
emigration,  or  at  least  rendered  normal.  Italy  finds  herself  in  the  posi- 
tion in  which  Germany  was  for  many  years,  losing  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  her  citizens  each  year.  With  the  expansion 
of  German  industries  the  outgoing  stream  grew  less  until, 
in  1908,  it  practically  ceased,  owing  to  the  fact  that  her 
mines  and  factories  had  so  far  developed  as  to  give  employ- 
ment to  all. 

Though  the  conditions  of  Italian  life  present  many  grave 
problems,  yet  it  is  clear  that  the  prosperity  of  the  country 
is  increasing.  Discontent  is  not  as  widespread  or  as  clam- 
orous as  at  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Even  the 
enormous  emigration  is  not  evidence  exclusively  of  poverty, 


THE  PRESENT  SITUATION  387 

but  is,  to  some  extent,  due  to  the  ease  and  cheapness  of 
our  present  means  of  communication,  and  bears  witness  to 
the  difference  between  Italian  wages  and  foreign  wages,  to 
the  fact  that  the  labor  market  to-day  is  mobile,  is,  in  fact,  a 
world  market.  Victor  Emmanuel  III,  by  associating  himself  Italia 
actively  with  all  works  of  national  betterment,  has  strength- 
ened the  hold  of  the  monarchy  upon  the  people.  The  repub- 
lican agitation  appears  moribund.  And  the  governing  classes 
of  the  state  have  profited  by  their  mistakes,  and  have  learned 
the  truth  of  Cavour's  assertion — that  the  first  attribute  of 
a  statesman  is  "  tact  to  discern  the  possible." 


CHAPTER  XVII 
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 

AUSTRIA  TO  THE  COMPROMISE  OF  1867 

Austria's  Austria,   perilously   near   dissolution   in   1848,   torn   by 

revolutions  in  Bohemia,  Hungary,  the  Lombardo-Venetian 
kingdom,  and  its  influence  in  Germany  temporarily  para- 
lyzed, had  emerged  triumphant  from  the  storm,  and  by 
1850  was  in  a  position  to  impose  her  will  once  more  upon 
her  motley  group  of  states.  She  learned  no  lesson  from  the 
fearful  crisis  just  traversed,  but  at  once  entered  upon  a 
course  of  reaction  of  the  old  familiar  kind.  Absolutism  was 
everywhere  restored.  Italy  was  ruled  with  an  iron  hand, 
Prussia  was  humiliated  in  a  most  emphatic  manner  at 
Olmiitz,  the  German  Confederation  was  restored,  and 
Austrian  primacy  in  it  conspicuously  reaffinned.  Hungary 
felt  the  full  weight  of  Austrian  displeasure.  She  was  con- 
sidered to  have  forfeited  by  her  rebellion  the  old  historic 
rights  she  had  possessed  for  centuries.  Her  Diet  was  abol- 
ished, her  local  self-government,  in  her  county  assemblies,  was 
suppressed,  Croatia,  Transylvania,  and  the  Servian  country 
were  severed  from  her,  and  the  Kingdom  itself  was  cut  up  into 
five  sections,  each  ruled  separately.  Hungary  was  hence- 
forth governed  from  Vienna  and  largely  by  Germans.  She 
was  for  the  next  few  years  simply  a  vassal  of  Austria,  whose 
policy  was  to  crush  and  extinguish  all  traces  of  her  separate 
nationality.  Francis  Joseph,  however,  found  it  in  the  end 
impossible  to  break  the  spirit  of  the  Magyars,  who  bent 
beneath  the  autocrat  but  did  not  abate  their  claims.  During 
the  revolution,  Francis  Joseph  had  granted  a  constitution 
to  the  whole  Empire  (March  4,  1849).     Tliis  was  revoked 

388 


FRANCIS  JOSEPH'S  CHANGE  OF  POLICY    389 

December  31,  1851  "  in  the  name  of  the  unity  of  the  empire 
and  monarchical  principles."  For  ten  years  absolutism  and 
centralization  prevailed  throughout  the  dominions  of  the 
youthful  ruler.  One  achievement  of  the  revolution  remained 
untouched,  the  abolition  of  feudalism,  the  liberation  of  the 
peasantry,  a  great  economic  and  social  change  benefiting 
millions  of  people. 

To  perpetuate  a  system  of  this  character  the  Government  Failure  of 
must  sedulously  avoid  any  disaster  that  would  weaken  its  *^®  ^^^  ^^ 
power,  any  crisis  in  which  it  would  need  the  support  of  all 
its  subjects.  This  it  did  not  do.  The  crisis  of  1859,  the 
failure  of  that  year  in  Italy,  sealed  the  doom  of  a  system 
universally  odious,  and  which  was  now  seen  to  be  unable 
to  maintain  the  integrity  of  the  Empire.  As  a  result  of  the 
war  Austria  was  forced  to  cede  Lombardy  to  Piedmont, 
and  afterward  to  remain  inactive  while  the  Italians  made 
waste  paper  of  the  Treaty  of  Zurich,  which  she  had  con- 
cluded with  France.  She  was  compelled  to  continue  this 
passive  attitude  because  of  the  utter  demoralization  of 
her  finances,  and  particularly  because  of  the  threatening 
situation  in  Hungary.  Austria's  distress  was  Hungary's 
opportunity.  Thousands  of  Hungarians  had  joined  the 
armies  opposed  to  her,  and  rebellion  was  likely  to  break 
forth  at  any  moment  in  Hungary  itself.  Peace  had  to  be 
secured  at  any  price. 

This  time  the  Austrian  government  profited  by  experience.  Francis 
In  order  to  increase  the  strength  of  the  state  by  actively  Joseph  re- 
interesting  his  various  peoples  in  it  so  that  they  would  be 
willing  to  make  sacrifices  for  it,  Francis  Joseph  resolved 
to  break  with  the  previous  policy  of  his  reign,  to  sweep 
away  abuses,  redress  grievances,  and  introduce  liberal  re- 
forms. But  the  problem  was  exceedingly  complicated,  and 
was  only  slowly  worked  out  after  several  experiments  had 
been  tried  which  had  resulted  in  failure.  The  chief  diffi- 
culty lay  in  the  adjustment  of  the  claims  of  the  different 
races  over  which  he  ruled.      How  could  these  be  granted,  and 


390 


AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 


Federalism 
or  centrali- 
zation? 


Austria 
"becomes  a 
constitu- 
tional state, 


Hungary 
refuses  to 
co-operate. 


yet  the  power  of  the  monarchy  remain  strong,  Austria  remain 
a  great  European  power,  able  to  speak  decisively  in  European 
councils?  Opinion  was  divided  as  to  the  method  to  pursue. 
There  were  at  least  two  parties — those  who  wished  to  em- 
phasize the  principle  of  federalism  in  the  government,  and 
those  who  wished  to  emphasize  the  principle  of  unity.  The 
federalists  demanded  that  the  equality  of  all  the  countries 
within  the  Empire  should  be  recognized,  that  each  should 
make  its  own  internal  laws,  and  should  administer  them. 
Austria  would  then  be  a  federal  state  with  home  rule  as  the 
recognized  basis  of  the  government  of  the  several  parts,  and 
with  a  central  parliament  for  purely  imperial  affairs.  The 
other  party,  emphasizing  the  idea  of  unity,  believed  that  the 
central  government  should  possess  large  powers  in  order  to 
play  a  commanding  role  among  the  European  states.  That 
the  unity  of  the  Empire  might  be  preserved,  and  emphasized 
home  rule  should  be  limited  in  scope,  the  central  government 
must  be  endowed  with  great  authority. 

The  Emperor  at  first  tried  the  federal  system  in  I860. 
This  experiment  not  working  to  his  satisfaction,  he  in- 
augurated a  new  system  in  1861.  Under  this  there  was 
to  be  a  parliament  for  the  whole  Empire,  di^^ded  into  two 
chambers,  meeting  annually.  Its  functions  were  important. 
The  two  chambers  were  to  be  a  House  of  Lords,  appointed 
by  the  Emperor,  and  a  House  of  Representatives  of  343 
members  to  be  chosen  by  the  local  diets.  (Hungary  85, 
Transylvania  20,  Croatia  9,  Bohemia  54,  ]Moravia  22, 
Galicia  38).  The  local  diets  were  to  continue  for  local 
affairs  but  with  reduced  powers.  By  this  constitution, 
granted  by  the  Emperor,  Austria  became  a  constitutional 
monarchy.  Absolutism  as  a  form  of  government  was  aban- 
doned. 

But  tliis  constitution  was  a  failure,  and  chiefly  because 
of  the  attitude  of  the  Hungarians.  To  the  first  parliament 
Hungary  declined  to  send  representatives,  an  attitude  she 
maintained  steadily  for  several  years  until  a  new  arrange- 


THE  RESISTANCE  OF  HUNGARY  391 

ment  was  made  satisfactory  to  her.  Why  did  she  refuse 
to  recognize  a  constitution  that  represented  a  great  advance 
in  liberalism  over  anything  the  Empire  had  known  before? 
Why  did  she  refuse  to  send  representatives  to  a  parliament 
in  which  she  would  have  weight  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  her  inhabitants?  Why  did  she  steadily  refuse  to  accept 
an  arrangement  that  seemed  both  liberal  and  fair? 

It  must  be  constantly  remembered  that  Hungary  consists 
of  several  races,  and  that  of  these  races  the  Magyars  have 
always  been  the  dominant  one,  though  in  a  numerical  minority. 
This  dominant  race  was  divided  into  two  parties,  one  of 
irrcconcilables,  men  who  bitterly  hated  Austria,  who  would 
listen  to  no  compromise  with  her,  whose  ideal  was  absolute  in- 
dependence. These  men,  however,  were  not  now  in  control. 
They  were  discredited  by  the  failures  of  1849.  The  leaders 
of  Hungary  were  now  the  moderate  liberals,  at  whose  head 
stood  Francis  Deak,  the  wisest  and  most  influential  Hun- 
garian statesman  of  the  nineteenth  century.  These  men 
were  willing  to  compromise  with  Austria  on  the  question 
of  giving  the  requisite  strength  to  the  government  of  the 
whole  Empire  to  enable  it  to  play  its  role  as  a  great  European 
power,  but  they  were  absolutely  firm  in  their  opposition 
to  the  constitution  just  granted  by  Francis  Joseph,  and  im- 
movable in  their  determination  to  secure  the  legal  rights 
of  Hungary.  Their  reasons  for  opposing  the  new  constitu-  Reasons 
tion,  which  promised  so  vast  an  improvement  upon  the  old  ^°^  ^^^ 
unprogressive  absolutism  that  had  reigned  for  centuries, 
for  thwarting  the  Emperor,  who  was  frankly  disposed  to 
enter  the  path  of  liberalism,  are  most  important. 

They  asserted  that  Hungary  had  always  been  a  separate  The 
nation,   united   with  Austria   simply   in  the   person   of   the  Hungarians 
monarch,  who  was  king  in  Hungary  as  he  was  emperor  in  ,  . 

his  own  hereditary  states ;  that  he  was  king  in  Hungary  only  rights." 
after  he  had  taken  an  oath  to  support  the  fundamental  laws 
of  Hungary,  and  had  been  crowned  in  Hungary  with  the 
iron  crown  of  St.  Stephen ;  that  these  fundamental  laws  and 


392  AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  184<9 

institutions  were  in  pai't  centui'ics  old,  had  in  a  sense  been 
redefined  in  the  laws  of  1848,  which  Ferdinand  I  had 
formally  accepted  in  their  new  statement ;  that  no  change 
could  be  made  without  the  consent  of  both  contracting 
parties;  that  the  Emperor-King  as  merely  one  party  to  the 
contract  had  no  right  to  alter  them  in  jot  or  tittle  by  any 
exercise  of  his  own  power ;  that  they  were  therefore  still 
the  law  of  the  land;  that  Hungary  was  an  historic  state, 
with  definite  boundaries,  including  Transylvania  and  Cro- 
atia ;  "  that  a  people  which  has  had  a  past  is  never  able 
to  forget  its  history  " ;  that  the  new  constitution  was  one 
"  granted  "  by  Francis  Joseph,  and  if  granted,  might  be 
withdrawn ;  that  whatever  its  abstract  merits  were,  it  was 
unacceptable  by  reason  of  its  origin;  that,  moreover,  it  was 
designed  for  the  whole  Empire,  and  that  its  effect  was  to 
And  demand  make    Hungary    a    mere    province    of   Austria;    that    what 

e   res  ora-  ^^,^^    Avanted    was    not    a    constitution,    but     the    constitu- 
tion of  their    .  ,  .         ,  .  i  -n        n 
constitu-        ^io^    ^^    Hungary,    which    had,    snice    1848,    been    illegally 

tion.  suspended. 

This  party  differed  from  the  revolutionary  party  of 
1848  and  1849  in  that  it  recognized  that  the  times  did  not 
permit  a  merely  "  personal  "  union  of  Austria  and  Hungary, 
but  that  the  interests  of  each  demanded  a  certain  "  real  " 
union,  a  certain  strength  for  the  central  government  that 
should  enable  it  to  act  with  decision  and  authority  in  foreign 
affairs,  and  the  party  was  prepared  to  make  concessions 
enough  to  render  this  possible.  Only,  the  concessions  must 
come  later,  after  the  Emperor  had  formally  recognized  the 
historic  rights  of  Hungary,  and  must  come  then  only  after 
fair  discussion.  The  unity  represented  by  the  new  parlia- 
ment it  would  never  consent  to.  In  that  assembly  it  would 
be  a  minority  outnumbered  by  "  foreigners,"  for  all  the 
other  peoples  of  the  Empire  were,  in  its  eyes,  foreigners ; 
it  would  not  fuse  its  individuality  in  the  general  mass  of  all 
the  inhabitants ;  it  was  determined  to  preserve  the  historic 
personality  of  Hungary.     Francis  Joseph  must  first  consider 


THE  COMPROMISE  OF  1867  393 

himself  personally   bound   to   accede   to   the  laws   of   1848, 
which  his  predecessor,  Ferdinand,  had  ratified. 

The  new  experiment  of  an  imperial  parliament  finally 
broke  down  beneath  the  impact  of  this  persistent  Hungarian 
refusal  to  accept  it.  For  four  years,  from  1861  to  1865, 
there  was  a  deadlock,  neither  side  giving  way.  The  con-  A  deadlock, 
dition  of  the  country  grew  worse,  the  deficit  continued  to 
increase.  The  Emperor,  recognizing  the  failure  of  his  plans,  Francis 
recognizing  that  Hungary  was  really  a  separate  nation, —  Joseph 
strongly  conscious  of  lier  own  distinct  history  and  person- 
ality and  utterly  unwilling  to  enter  a  unified  monarchy 
however  liberal, — ^finally  determined  to  adapt  himself  to  the 
situation.  Negotiations  were  begun  with  the  Hungarians, 
the  object  of  which  was  to  harmonize  their  claims  with 
the  unity  and  power  of  the  Empire.  These  negotiations  be- 
gan in  1865,  were  interrupted  in  1866  by  the  Austro-Prus- 
sian  war,  and  were  completed  in  1867.  Indeed,  the  war  facili- 
tated the  great  work,  as  showing  once  more  how  heavy  was 
the  cost  to  the  Empire  of  Hungarian  disaffection,  how  im- 
perative it  was  for  the  power  of  the  monarchy  that  Hungary 
should  be  contented.  Moreover,  as  by  that  war  Austria 
was  expelled  from  Germany,  it  was  imperative  for  the  mon- 
archy to  gain  additional  strength  elsewhere.  The  negotia- 
tions  resulted  accordingly,  in   1867,  in  the  Compromise   or  The 

Ausff-leich,  which  is  the  basis  of  the  Empire  to-day.     It  was    o™P^°' 
°  '  .  ™ise  of 

accepted  by  the  Emperor  and  the  Parliaments  of  both  coun-  ^ggy^ 

tries.     Francis  Joseph  was  in  the  same  year  crowned  King 
of  Hungary. 

Thus  was  created  a  curious  kind  of  state  defying  classifica- 
tion. Neither  federalism  nor  unity  was  the  outcome  of 
the  long  constitutional  struggle,  but  dualism.  The  Empire  The  Dual 
was  henceforth  to  be  called  Austria-Hungary,  and  was  to  be  ^^^^^  y* 
a  dual  monarchy.  Austria-Hungary  consists  of  two  dis- 
tinct, independent  states,  which  stand  in  law  upon  a  plane 
of  complete  equality.  They  have  the  same  flag.  They  have 
the  same  ruler,  who  in  Austria  bears  the  title  of  Emperor, 


394.  AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  184,9 

in  Hungary  that  of  King.  Each  has  its  own  parHament, 
its  own  ministry,  its  own  administration.  Each  governs 
itself  in  all  internal  affairs  absolutely  without  interference 
from  the  other. 

But  the  two  are  united,  not  simply  in  the  person  of  the 
monarch.  They  are  united  for  certain  affairs  regarded  as 
common  to  both.  There  is  a  joint  ministry  composed 
of  three  departments :  Foreign  Affairs,  War,  and  Finance, 
Each  state  has  its  own  parliament,  but  there  is  no  parliament 
in  common.  In  order  then  to  have  a  body  that  shall  super- 
vise the  work  of  the  three  joint  ministries  there  was 
The  Dele-  established  the  system  of  "  delegations."  Each  parliament 
gations.  chooses  a  delegation  of  sixty  of  its  members.  These  dele- 
gations meet  alternately  in  Vienna  and  Budapest.  They 
are  really  committees  of  the  two  parliaments.  They  sit 
and  debate  separatel}^,  each  using  its  own  language,  and 
they  communicate  with  each  other  in  writing.  If  after  three 
communications  no  decision  has  been  reached  a  joint  session 
is  held  in  which  the  question  is  settled  without  debate  by  a 
mere  majority  vote. 

Other  affairs,  which  in  most  countries  are  considered  com- 
mon to  all  parts,  such  as  tariff  and  currency  systems,  do 
not  fall  within  the  competence  of  the  joint  ministr}^  or 
the  delegations.  They  are  to  be  regulated  by  agreements 
concluded  between  the  two  parliaments  for  periods  of  ten 
years,  an  awkward  arrangement  creating  an  intense  strain 
every  decade,  for  the  securing  of  these  agreements  is  most 
difficult. 
The  This   Compromise  was  satisfactory  only  to   the  Germans 

Compromise   ^^^  ^^^  Magyars,  each  the  dominant  party  in  its  section, 
satisfactory  ,     ,  i       i        •  •      i       •        -^ 

only  to  the    "^^  each  also  m  a  numerical  minority. 

dominant  One  of  the  important  results  therefore  of  the  expulsion 

races.  ^f  Austria   from   Germany   after  the   Austro-Prussian   war 

of  1866  was  the  internal  transformation  of  the  Austrian 
Empire  itself.  The  German  element  in  that  state  was  weak- 
ened, the  Hungarians  had  to  be  appeased,  and  as  a  conse- 


THE  DUAL  MONARCHY  395 

quence  the  Ausgleich  or  Compromise  of  1867  was  worked 
out.  By  this  the  former  Austrian  Empire  was  divided  into 
two  states,  the  Empire  of  Austria  and  the  Kingdom  of 
Hungary,  the  two  together  known  henceforth  as  Austria- 
Hungary.  The  small  river  Leitha  forms  in  part  the  bound- 
ary between  the  two,  Hungary  being  known  as  Transleithania, 
Austria  as  Cisleithania.  The  capital  of  Austria  is  Vienna; 
of  Hungary,  Budapest.  The  Constitution  of  the  collective 
state  is  the  Compromise  of  1867,  already  described.  Each 
state  also  possesses  a  constitution  of  its  own.  In  Austria  the  Constitution 
Constitution  of  1861  was  liberally  revised  by  five  laws  passed  °^  Austria, 
in  1867,  by  which  full  parliamentary  government  was  es- 
tablished, the  Emperor  choosing  his  ministry  from  the 
majority  party  or  group  in  Parliament.  The  Parliament  or 
Reichsrath  was  to  consist  of  two  chambers,  a  House  of  Lords 
and  a  House  of  Representatives,  which  numbered  at  that 
time  203  members.  These  were  chosen,  not  directly  by  the 
voters,  but  by  the  diets  or  local  legislatures  of  each  of  the 
seventeen  provinces  into  which  Austria  is  divided,  for  each 
province  has  its  local  legislature  for  local  purposes. 

Li  Hungary  the  Constitution  of  1848  was  restored,  with  Constitution 
some  alterations.  Thus  Hungary  had  a  parliament  of  two 
chambers,  the  Table  of  Magnates,  composed  chiefly  of  nobles, 
and  the  Table  of  Deputies,  elected  directly  by  the  voters, 
all  males  twenty  years  of  age  and  paying  a  certain  amount 
in  taxes.  Though  this  amount  was  small  it  resulted  in  the 
exclusion  of  about  three-fourths  of  the  adult  males.  Thus 
in  neither  state  did  universal  suffrage  exist.  A  demand  for 
this  has  since  been  repeatedly  made  in  both  countries  with 
results  that  will  appear  later. 

Neither  of  the  two  states  had  a  homogeneous  population.  The 
In  each  there  was  a  dominant  race,  the  Germans  in  Austria,  dominant 
the  Magyars  in  Hungary.      The  Compromise  of  1867  was 
satisfactory   to   these   alone.     In   each   country   there   were 
subordinate   and  rival  races,  jealous   of  the  supremacy   of 
these  two,  anxious  for  recognition  and  for  power,  and  ren- 


396  AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 

dercd  more  insistent  by  the  sight  of  the  remarkable  success 
of  the  Magyars  in  asserting  their  individuahty.  In  Hun- 
gary there  were  Croatia,  Slavonia,  and  Transylvania;  in 
Austria  there  were  seventeen  provinces,  each  with  its  own 
diet,  representing  almost  always  a  variety  of  races.  Some 
of  these,  notably  Bohemia,  had  in  former  centuries  had 
a  separate  statehood,  which  they  wished  to  recover;  others 
were  gaining  an  increasing  self-consciousness,  and  desired 
a  future  controlled  by  themselves  and  in  their  own  interests. 
Divisive  The  struggles   of  these  races  were  destined  to  form  the 

^  ^^  most  important  feature  of  Austrian  history  during  the  next 

of  the  ^  ... 

principle  of  ^orty  years.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  principle  of  nation- 
nationality  ality,  so  effective  in  bringing  about  the  unification  of  Italy 
m  Austria-  ^^^  Germany,  has  tended  in  Austria  in  precisely  the  opposite 
direction,  the  sphtting  up  of  a  single  state  into  many.  Dual- 
ism was  established  in  1867,  but  these  subordinate  races  refuse 
to  acquiesce  in  that  as  a  final  form.  They  wish  to  change 
the  dual  into  a  federal  state,  which  shall  give  free  play 
to  the  several  nationalities.  The  fundamental  struggle  all 
these  years  has  been  between  these  two  principles — dualism 
and  federalism.  These  racial  and  nationalistic  struggles 
have  been  most  confusing,  crossing  each  other  in  various 
ways,  and  rendered  more  complex  by  their  connection  with 
other  forces,  such  as  liberalism,  clericalism,  socialism.  In 
the  interest  of  clearness,  only  a  few  of  the  more  important 
can  be  treated  here. 

The  Empire  of  Austria  and  the  Kingdom  of  Hungary, 
having  had  different  histories  since  1867,  may  best  be  treated 
separately. 

THE  EMPIRE  OF  AUSTRIA  SINCE  1867 

Austria  The  first  years  in  Austria  under  her  new  constitution  were 

since  1867,  y^^y.^  Qf  liberal  reforms.  The  constitution  guaranteed  com- 
plete religious  liberty.  To  give  effect  to  this  guarantee 
laws  were  passed  greatly  restricting  the  powers  of  the  Roman 
Catholic   Church.       Henceforth   all   forms   of   religion   were 


THE  DEMANDS  OF  BOHEMIA  397 

on    a   basis    of   legal    equality ;    each    person    might    freely  liberal 

choose  his  church  and  that  of  his  children,  or  might  decline   ^^^^  ation. 

connection  with  any.      The  public  schools   were  to  be  open 

to   all  citizens   without   regard  to   creed.       Churches   might 

maintain  schools  of  their  own  if  they  wished  to.      A  form 

of  marriage  by   civil  authorities   was   established  for   those 

cases  in  which  the  priest  refused  to  officiate.      By  these  laws 

religious  liberty  and  secular  education  were  established.    The 

Pope  denounced  them  as  "  abominable,"  and  declared  them 

null  and  void  "  for  the  present  and  the  future."      Despite 

these  fulminations  they  went  into  force. 

At  this  time  also  other  useful  laws  were  passed,  regulating 
the  finances,  altering  the  judicial  system,  and  introducing 
trial  by  jury,  and  reorganizing  the  military  system  along  the 
successful  Prussian  lines  of  universal  military  service  of  three 
years,  with  service  in  the  reserve  for  several  years  longer. 

At  the  same  time  the  Austrian  Government  was  con-  Demands  of 
fronted  by  questions  far  more  baffling.  Various  nationali-  t^^  Czechs, 
ties,  or  would-be  nationalities,  demanded  that  they  should 
now  receive  as  liberal  treatment  as  Hungary  had  received 
in  the  Compromise  of  1867.  The  leaders  in  this  movement 
were  the  Czechs  of  Bohemia,  who,  in  1868,  definitely  stated 
their  position,  which  was  precisely  that  of  the  Hungarians 
before  1867.  They  claimed  that  Bohemia  was  an  historic 
and  independent  nation,  united  with  the  other  states  under 
the  House  of  Hapsburg  only  in  the  person  of  the  monarch. 
They  demanded  that  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia  should  be 
restored,  that  Francis  Joseph  should  be  crowned  in  Prague 
with  the  crown  of  Wenceslaus. 

The  Galicians  in  the  north,  the  Slovenes  and  Serbs  in 
the  south,  brought  forward  similar,  though  not  as  sweeping, 
demands.  These  groups,  imitating  the  successful  methods 
of  the  Magyars,  refused  to  sit  in  the  Austrian  Parliament 
in  Vienna,  declining  to  recognize  the  authority  of  institu- 
tions in  the  creation  of  which  they  had  had  no  share.  The 
moral  authority  of  the  new  Parliament  was  therefore  greatly 


398 


AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 


The 

Emperor 
prepares  to 
concede 
them. 


Opposition 
of  Germans 
and 
Magyars. 


Triumph   of 
dualism. 


reduced.  The  agitation  became  so  great  that  the  Emperor 
decided  to  yield  to  the  Bohemians.  On  September  14,  1871, 
he  formally  recognized  the  historic  rights  of  the  Kingdom 
of  Bohemia,  and  agreed  to  be  crowned  king  in  Prague,  as 
he  had  been  crowned  king  in  Budapest.  Arrangements 
were  to  be  made  whereby  Bohemia  should  gain  the  same 
rights  as  Hungary,  independence  in  domestic  affairs  and 
union  with  Austria  and  Hungary  for  certain  general  pur- 
poses. The  dual  monarchy  was  about  to  become  a  triple 
monarchy. 

But  these  promises  were  not  destined  to  be  carried  out. 
The  Emperor's  plans  were  bitterly  opposed  by  the  Germans 
of  Austria,  who,  as  the  dominant  class  and  as  also  a  minority 
of  the  whole  population,  feared  the  loss  of  their  supremacy, 
feared  the  rise  of  the  Slavs,  whom  thej  hated.  They  were 
bitterly  opposed,  also,  by  the  Magyars  of  Hungary,  who  de- 
clared that  this  was  undoing  the  Compromise  of  1867,  and 
who  feared  particularly  that  the  rise  of  the  Slavic  state  of  Bo- 
hemia would  rouse  the  Slavic  peoples  of  Hungary  to  demand 
the  same  rights,  and  the  Magyars  were  determined  not 
to  share  with  them  their  privileged  position.  The  opposi- 
tion to  the  Emperor's  plans  was  consequently  most  emphatic 
and  formidable.  It  was  also  pointed  out  that  the  manage- 
ment of  foreign  affairs  would  be  much  more  difficult  with 
three  nations  directing  rather  than  two.  The  Emperor 
yielded  to  the  opposition.  The  decree  that  was  to  place 
Bohemia  on  an  equality  with  Austria  and  Hungary  never 
came.  Dualism  had  triumphed  over  federalism,  to  the  im- 
mense indignation  of  those  who  saw  the  prize  snatched  from 
them.  Where  the  Bohemians  had  failed,  obviously  the  weaker 
groups — Galicians,  Serbs — could  not  succeed.  The  Compro- 
mise of  1867  remained  unchanged.  The  House  of  Hapsburg 
to  this  day  rules  over  a  dual,  not  over  a  federal  state. 

A  radical  change  in  the  constitution  was  thus  definitely 
rejected.  Gradually  the  extreme  demands  of  the  various 
races  subsided.      The  Czechs  lost  much  of  their  power  by 


THE  ELECTORAL  SYSTEM  399 

splitting  into  two  groups.  The  constitutional  regime  slowly 
struck  root.  For  some  years  it  was  the  Germans  who  con- 
trolled the  Austrian  Parliament  and  the  ministry.     In  1873  a 

change  was   made   in   the   electoral   system.       Hitherto   the  Electoral 

■  reform 

members    of   the   Reichsrath,    or   Imperial   Parliament,   had 

been  elected  by  the  diets  of  the  different  provinces.  This 
was  objected  to  as  giving  the  Reichsrath  the  appearance 
of  a  congress  of  delegates,  rather  than  of  a  real  parliament. 
Moreover,  any  diet,  by  refusing  to  elect  delegates  (as  Bo- 
hemia had  frequently  done),  could  so  reduce  the  national 
representation  as  to  destroy  its  moral  authority.  The  new 
law  of  1873  withdrew  this  power  from  the  provincial  diets 
and  gave  it  directly  to  those  who  had  the  right  to  elect 
the  diets.  Now  the  right  to  choose  the  members  of  these  diets 
was  not  vested  in  a  general  mass  of  electors,  but  was  vested 
in  certain  groups  or  classes,  four  in  number — -the  landowners, 
the  cities,  the  chambers  of  commerce,  and  the  rural  districts. 
Each  class  elected  a  certain  number  of  members  of  the  diets. 
It  was  now  provided  that  each  should  henceforth  elect  a  cer- 
tain number  of  members  of  the  Reichsrath.  All  that  the 
change  of  1873  accomplished  was  to  substitute  direct  elec- 
tion by  the  four  classes  for  indirect  election  by  the  diets. 
The  number  of  members  of  the  Reichsrath  was  increased 
from  203  to  353.  The  number  of  voters  in  each  class 
and  the  relative  weight  of  the  individual  voter  varied 
enormously.  Thus  in  1890,  in  the  class  of  landowners, 
there  was  one  deputy  to  every  63  voters,  one  to  27  in  the 
class  of  chambers  of  commerce,  one  to  2,918  in  that  of 
cities,  one  to  11,600  in  that  of  rural  districts.  With  such 
a  system  further  demands  for  reform  were  inevitable,  and 
have,  as  we  shall  see,  figured  prominently  in  later  history. 

The  German  element  maintained  control  of  the  Austrian 
Parliament  as  long  as  it  remained  united,  but  breaking  up 
finally  into  three  groups,  and  incurring  the  animosity  of 
the  Emperor  by  constantly  blocking  his  measures,  its  minis- 
try fell  in  1879,  and  was  succeeded  by  one  of  a  very  different 


400 


AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 


The  Taaffe 
ministry. 


The  Slavs 
favored. 


Growth  of 

radical 

parties- 


character  under  Taaffe.  This  ministry  lasted  fourteen 
years,  from  1879  to  1893.  While  Taaffe  steadily  refused 
to  alter  the  Constitution  of  1867  in  the  direction  of  federal- 
ism, his  policy  nevertheless  greatly  stimulated  the  growth  of 
the  federalist  spirit.  Relying  for  parliamentary  support 
upon  the  Czechs  and  Poles  against  the  Germans,  he  was  forced 
to  make  concessions  to  them.  In  Bohemia  the  Czechs  were 
favored  in  various  ways.  They  secured  an  electoral  law  which 
assured  them  a  majority  in  the  Bohemian  Diet  and  in  the 
Bohemian  delegation  to  the  Reichsrath;  they  obtained  a 
university,  by  the  division  into  two  institutions  of  that  of 
Prague,  the  oldest  German  university,  founded  in  1356. 
Thus  there  is  a  German  University  of  Prague  and  a  Czechish 
(1882).  By  various  ordinances  German  was  dethroned  from 
its  position  as  sole  official  language.  After  1886  office- 
holders were  required  to  answer  the  demands  of  the  public 
in  the  language  in  which  they  were  presented,  either  German 
or  Czechish.  This  rule  operated  unfavorably  for  German 
officials,  who  were  usually  unable  to  speak  Czechish,  whereas 
the  Czechs,  as  a  rule,  spoke  both  languages. 

In  Galicia  the  Poles,  though  a  minority,  obtained  control  of 
the  Diet,  supported  by  the  Taaffe  ministry,  and  proceeded 
to  oppress  the  Ruthenians ;  in  Carniola  the  Slovenes  pro- 
ceeded to  Slavicize  the  province.  Thus  the  Slavs  were 
favored  during  the  long  ministry  of  Taaffe,  and  the  evolu- 
tion of  the  Slavic  nationalities  and  peoples  progressed  at 
the  expense  of  the  Germans. 

Under  this  long  administration  the  financial  condition  of 
Austria  improved.  The  chronic  deficit  disappeared  and 
receipts  exceeded  expenditures  for  the  first  time  in  many 
years.  In  social  legislation  the  policies  of  Bismarck  were 
imitated  by  the  compulsory  insurance  of  workingmen  and  the 
repression  of  Socialists,  for  it  was  also  at  this  time  that  the 
Socialist  party  became  prominent.  This  was,  here  as  else- 
where, a  radical  democratic  party,  demanding  universal 
suffrage,  obligatory  and  free  education,  the  complete  laiciza- 


MOVEMENTS  IN  BOHEMIA  401 

tlon  of  the  state.  This  party  was  not  local,  like  the  racial 
and  nationalistic  groups,  but  was  interprovincial,  thus  cut- 
ting across  the  parties  already  existing  and  increasing  the 
confusion. 

In  Bohemia  there  was  a  movement  in  favor  of  democracy.  Division 
which  was  independent  of  the  Socialists.  The  Czechs  had  among  the 
long  been  divided  into  Old  and  Young  Czechs,  They 
had  worked  together  as  against  the  Germans,  but  now  that 
they  were  in  the  main  victorious  in  this,  they  flew  apart. 
The  Young  Czechs  were  a  democratic  party,  demanding 
universal  suffrage,  secular  schools,  liberty  of  the  press  and 
of  public  meetings.  After  1887  this  party,  profiting  by 
the  concessions  of  the  Taaff'e  ministry,  began  to  agitate 
fiercely  in  favor  of  a  reconstrution  of  Bohemian  nationality, 
whereas  the  Old  Czechs  were  willing  to  abide  by  the  Com- 
promise of  1867.  By  1891  the  Young  Czechs  had  swept 
the  Old  Czechs  completely  from  the  field.  An  attempt  by 
the  Government  to  stop  this  movement  had  resulted  in  total 
failure.  The  Germans  of  Bohemia,  on  the  other  hand, 
opposed  with  vehemence  the  nationalist  aspirations  of  the 
Czechs.  So  fierce  did  race  struggles  become  that  in  1893 
the  Government  was  forced  to  proclaim  the  state  of  siege 
in  Prague.  The  situation  became  so  difficult  for  the  Taaffe 
ministry  that  it  resigned  in  1893. 

Thus  racial  movements  and  democratic  movements  were 
in  full  swing  at  the  close  of  this  long  ministry.  To  satisfy 
the  latter,  Taaffe,  just  before  his  fall,  brought  forward 
a  radical  electoral  reform,  which  would  have  increased  the 
number  of  voters  from  about  1,500,000  to  4,500,000.  The 
proposal  failed,  but,  the  agitation  continuing,  the  succeeding 
ministry  in  1896  carried  through  a  more  limited  measure. 
The  existing  four  electoral  classes  were  left  as  they  were ;  Electoral 
but  a  fifth  class  was  created,  which  was  to  elect  72  additional  reform, 
members  to  Parliament.  This  class  was  to  include  all  men  of 
twenty-four  years  of  age  or  older.  It  included,  therefore,  all 
those  of  the  four  other  classes,  members   of  which,   conse- 


402  AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 

quently,  posssessed  under  the  new  system  a  double  vote.  The 
result  was  to  make  the  system  of  representation  more  complex 
than  ever,  without  giving  numbers  anything  like  their  due 
weight.  Thus  five  million  and  a  half  voters  would  choose  72 
members,  whereas  the  1,700,000  voters  of  the  four  other 
classes  would  choose  353 ;  the  class  of  great  landed  proprie- 
tors, numbering  only  about  5,000,  would  choose  85  members. 
Obviously,  such  a  system  would  not  satisfy  the  growing 
demand  for  a  democratic  suffrage.  It  was  a  mere  temporary 
expedient. 
Universal  The  agitation  for  universal  suffrage  continued  to  increase 

suffrage.  during  the  next  decade,  and  was  finally  successful.  By 
the  law  of  January  26,  1907,  all  men  in  Austria  over  twenty- 
four  were  given  the  right  to  vote,  and  the  class  system  was 
abolished.  The  most  striking  result  of  the  first  elections 
on  this  popular  basis  (May  1907)  was  the  return  of  87 
Socialists,  who  polled  1,041,948  votes,  nearly  a  third  of  those 
cast.  This  party  had  previously  had  only  about  a  dozen 
representatives.  The  race  parties,  such  as  the  Young  Czechs, 
lost  heavily.  Whether  this  means  that  the  period  of  extreme 
racial  rivalry  is  over  and  the  struggle  of  social  classes  is 
to  be  the  feature  of  the  future,  the  future  only  will  show. 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  HUNGARY  SINCE  1867 

Hungary,  a  country  larger  than  Austria,  larger  than 
Great  Britain,  found  her  historic  individuality  definitely 
recognized  and  guaranteed  by  the  Compromise  of  1867. 
She  had  successfully  resisted  all  attempts  to  merge  her  with 
the  other  countries  subject  to  the  House  of  Hapsburg.  She 
is  an  independent  kingdom  under  the  crown  of  St.  Stephen. 
The  sole  official  language  is  Magyar,  which  is  neither  Slavic 
nor  Teutonic,  but  Turanian  in  origin. 

The  political  history  of  Hungary  since  the  Compromise 

,    has  been  much  more  simple  than  that  of  Austria.     Race  and 

language  questions  have  been  fundamental,  but  they  have 

been  decided  in  a  summary  manner.      The  ruling  race  in 


THE  POLICY  OF  THP:  MAGYARS  403 

1867  was  the  Magyar,  and  it  has  remained  the  ruling  race.  The 
Though   numerically   in   the   minority   in    1867,   comprising  Magyars, 
only    about   six   million    out    of    fifteen    million,   they   were 
a  strong  race,  accustomed  to  rule  and  determined  to  rule. 
The  majority  of  the  population,  on  the  other  hand,  was  split 
up  into  several  races,  consisted  mostly  of  peasants,  and  had 
no  political  training,  and  no  able  leadership.     Only  in  Croatia 
was  there  a  Slavic  people,  with  separate  institutions  and  a  The 
strong   individuality.      The   Magyars    recognized   this    fact,  Croatians. 
having  learned  a  useful  lesson  from  the  failure  of  1849,  and 
concluded  with  Croatia  in  1868  a  compromise  very  similar 
to  the  one  they  had  themselves  concluded  with  Austria  in  the 
year  preceding.     In  regard  to  all  the  other  races,  the  dom- 
inant  people  resolved  to  Magyarize  them   early   and  thor-  The  policy 
oughly,  a  policy  it  has  since  steadily  persisted  in.     The  Mag-  °         agyar-^ 

^       IZcLXlOU* 

yars  have  insisted  upon  the  use  of  the  Magyar  tongue  m 
public  offices,  courts,  schools,  and  in  the  railway  service — 
wherever,  in  fact,  it  has  been  possible.  They  have  refused  to 
make  any  concessions  to  the  various  peoples,  and  have,  indeed, 
tried  to  stamp  but  their  peculiarities.  Besides  pursuing  this 
policy  of  vigorous  amalgamation,  they  have  developed  the 
country  economically.  The  Government  has  taken  over  the 
great  railways,  has  made  them  productive,  and  has  used  them 
to  further  this  process  of  Magyarization  by  encouraging  the 
country  people  to  come  into  the  cities,  where  the  Magyar 
influence  is  strongest.  They  have  steadily  supported  the 
Compromise  of  1867,  by  which  they  have  greatly  profited. 
They  have  reduced  the  authority  of  ecclesiastics  in  the 
state  by  establishing  civil  marriage,  and  the  registration  of 
births,  deaths,  and  marriages  by  state  authorities,  rather 
than  by  the  clergy. 

But  Hungary  has  not  yet  been  Magyarized.      Race  ques-  Race 
tions   are  still  important.       The   Croatians  wish  larger  in-  l^iestions. 
dependence  than  they  now  have.     There  are  powerful  parties 
among  the  Roumanians  in  Transylvania,  which  desire  sepa- 
ration from  Hungary  and  incorporation  in  the  Kingdom  of 


404  AUSTRIA-HUNGARY  SINCE  1849 

Roumania   to   the   east.       And   many   of   the   Slavs   in  the 
soutli  desire  annexation  to  the  Kingdom  of  Servia. 

Moreover,  in  recent  years  a  party  has  arisen  among  chh 
Magyars  themselves,  under  the  leadership  of  Francis  Kos- 
suth, son  of  Louis  Kossuth  of  1848,  which  is  opposed  to 
the  Compromise  of  1867,  and  wishes  to  have  Hungary  more 
independent  than  she  is.  This  party  demands  that  Hungary 
shall  have  her  oAvni  diplomatic  corps,  shall  control  her  rela- 
tions with  foreign  countries  independently  of  Austria,  and 
shall  possess  the  right  to  have  her  own  tariff.  Particularly 
does  it  demand  the  use  of  Magyar  in  the  Hungarian  part 
of  the  army  of  the  dual  monarchy — a  demand  pressed  pas- 
sionatel}^  but  resisted  thus  far  with  unshakable  firmness 
by  the  Emperor,  Francis  Joseph,  who  considers  that  the 
Struggle         safety  of  the  state  is  dependent  upon  having  one  language 

over  the         -j^  ^gg   ^^  ^|-^g   army,   that  there  may  not  be  confusion   and 

question  .  . 

of  language  disaster  on  the  battlefield.       Scenes  of  great  violence  have 

occurred  over  this  question,  both  in  Parliament  and  outside  of 
it,  but  the  Emperor  has  not  yielded.  Government  was  brought 
to  a  deadlock,  and,  indeed,  for  several  years  the  Ausgleich 
could  not  be  renewed,  save  by  the  arbitrary  act  of  the 
Emperor,  for  a  year  at  a  time.  Francis  Joseph  finally  threat- 
ened, if  forced  to  concede  the  recognition  of  the  Hungarian 
language,  to  couple  with  it  the  introduction  of  universal 
suffrage  into  Hungary,  for  which  there  is  a  growing  popular 
demand.  This  the  Magyars  do  not  wish,  fearing  that  it  will 
rob  them  of  their  dominant  position  by  giving  a  powerful 
weapon  to  the  politically  inferior  but  more  numerous  races, 
and  that  they  will,  therefore,  ultimately  be  submerged  by  the 
Slavs  about  them.  Less  than  twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the 
adult  male  population  of  Hungary  at  present  possess  the 
vote. 
Territorial  The   House   of   Hapsburg  has   lost   since   1815   the   rich 

fo^sl^^""*^  Lombardo- Venetian  kingdom  (1859-66).  It  has  gained, 
however,  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina.  As  a  result  of  the  Russo- 
Turkish  war  of  1877  these  Turkish  provinces  were  handed 


ANNEXATION  OF  BALKAN  PROVINCES     405 

over  by  the  Congress  of  Berlin  of  1878  to  Austria-Hungary 
to  "  occupy  "  and  "  administer."  The  Magyars  opposed 
the  assumption  of  these  provinces,  wishing  no  more  Slavs 
in  the  monarchy,  but  despite  their  opposition  they  were 
taken  over,  so  strongly  was  the  Emperor  in  favor  of  it.  This 
acquisition  of  these  Balkan  countries  renders  Austria-Hun- 
gary a  more  important  factor  in  all  Balkan  politics,  and 
in  the  discussions  concerning  the  so-called  Eastern  Question, 
namely,  the  future  of  European  Turkey.  In  October  1908 
Austria-Hungary  declared  them  formally  annexed. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

England  in        Great  Britain  appeared  in  1815,  to  the  superficial  ob- 
1815,  server,  in  a  brilliant  light.      She  had  persisted,  when  others 

had  faltered,  in  her  bitter  hostility  to  Napoleon.  She  had 
been  the  soul  of  the  coalitions,  and  the  crowning  victory 
of  Waterloo  seemed  to  place  her  at  the  very  head  of  the 
nations  of  Europe.  Her  energy  and  her  wealth  seemed  to 
be  unbounded.  Her  population  had  been  only  14,000,000 
at  the  beginning  of  the  great  war ;  at  the  end  it  was  19,000,- 
000.  Her  debt,  it  is  true,  had  increased  with  appalling 
rapidity.  Over  a  billion  dollars  in  1792,  it  was  over  four 
billion  in  1815.^  The  annual  interest  charge  amounted 
to  over  150,000,000  dollars.  Her  expenditures  during 
those  years  exceeded  seven  billion  dollars.  But  while  her 
debt  and  the  yearly  expenditures  grew  at  an  unprecedented 
rate,  the  wealth  of  the  country  grew  more  rapidly,  and  the 
burden  of  the  state  was  more  easily  borne  than  ever.  For 
the  period  had  been  one  of  extraordinary  material  develop- 
ment. The  growth  of  her  industry  at  home  and  her  com- 
merce abroad  had  made  her  easily  the  first  industrial  and 
the  first  commercial  power  in  the  world.  This  industrial 
and  commercial  supremacy,  fully  revealed  during  the  Na- 
poleonic wars  and  the  period  just  succeeding,  rested  upon 
a  series  of  remarkable  inventions  and  discoveries  made  by 
Englishmen   in   the  latter  part   of   the   eighteenth   century, 

inventions  so  momentous,  so   far  reaching  in  their  results, 
The  . 

Industrial      ^^^^  they  effected  what  has  been  justly  called  the  Industrial 

Revolution.   Revolution.       This  transformation   and  development  of  in- 

iDebt   in   1792,    £239,650,000;   in    1815,    £861,000,000. 
406 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION  407 

dustry  has  brought  with  it  a  complete  change  in  the  material 
conditions  of  life.  The  change  is  most  striking  in  the 
domain  of  manufacture.  Previously  nearly  everything  was 
made  by  hand.  Now  a  succession  of  English  inventors — 
Hargreaves,  Arkwright,  Crompton,  Cartwright — invented 
machines  which  completely  altered  the  methods  of  production 
in  the  two  basic  industries  of  England,  the  manufacture  of 
cotton  and  woolen  goods.  These  machines  could  produce 
more  in  a  given  time  than  many  hand  laborers  could  do.  The 
machine  was  substituted  for  the  hand  of  man,  as  the  chief 
feature  in  production.  But  there  was  a  limit  to  which,  under 
existing  conditions,  machine  industry  could  be  developed. 
That  limit  was  determined  by  the  amount  of  motive  force 
available  for  running  the  machines,  usually  too  large  and 
heavy  to  be  operated  by  hand.     The  only  motive  force  then  A  new 

used,  in  addition  to  that  of  men  and  animals,  was  that  of  the  motive 

force, 
wind  and  falling  water,  exploited  by  windmills  and  water- 
wheels.  But  such  force  was  precarious,  and  not  easily 
controlled.  The  wind  might  be  too  high,  or  there  might 
be  no  wind.  The  river  might  do  damage  by  floods,  or 
might  run  dry.  Industry  needed  a  new  motive  force,  limit- 
less in  quantity  and  capable  of  regulation.  This  it  found 
in  steam.  For  a  long  time  the  expansive  power  of  steam 
had  attracted  attention,  and  there  had  been  some  speculation 
during  the  last  hundred  years  as  to  the  possibility  of  using  it. 
A  blacksmith,  Newcomen,  had  made  a  tolerable  steam  en- 
gine in  1705,  which  could  be  used  in  pumping  water,  and 
was  so  used  in  many  mines  during  the  century.  But  it  was 
James  Watt,  a  mathematical  instrument  maker,  who  con- 
structed the  first  efficient  and  economical  steam  engine. 
Applying  for  his  first  patents  in  1769,  he  continued  to 
study  the  problem  and  improve  the  engine  until  his  death  The  steam 
in  1819.  From  about  1781  steam  engines  began  to  be  ^"ff^^®* 
used  in  manufacturing,  especially  in  cotton  and  woolen  fac- 
tories. The  invention  of  Watt  had  supplied  the  world  with 
a  new  motive  force  of  incalculable  effectiveness. 


408    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


The 

industrial 
primacy    of 
Great 
Britain. 


Advantages 
derived 
from  the 
Revolu- 
tionary 
and 

Napoleonic 
wars. 


These  inventions  and  processes  were  for  a  while  monopo- 
lized by  Great  Britain,  for  it  was  not  until  after  the  down- 
fall of  Napoleon  that  they  came  into  general  use  on  the 
Continent.  Manufacturing  on  a  large  scale,  she  was  able 
to  outstrip  all  possible  rivals.  She  first  developed  the  so- 
called  factory  system,  and  first  utilized  its  advantages. 
These  inventors,  says  an  historian  of  modern  England, 
"  did  more  for  the  cause  of  mankind  than  even  Wellington. 
Their  lives  had  more  influence  on  their  country's  future  than 
the  career  of  the  great  general.  His  victories  secured  his 
country  peace  for  rather  more  than  a  generation.  Their 
inventions  gave  Great  Britain  a  commercial  supremacy  which 
neither  war  nor  foreign  competition  has  yet  destroyed."  ^ 
*'  It  is  our  improved  steam  engine,"  wrote  Francis  Jeffrey  in 
the  Edinburgh  Review  in  1819,  "  that  has  fought  the  battles 
of  Europe,  and  exalted  and  sustained,  through  the  late  tre- 
mendous contest,  the  political  greatness  of  our  land.  It  is 
the  same  great  power  which  enables  us  now  to  pay  the  interest 
of  our  debt,  and  to  maintain  the  arduous  struggle  in  which 
we  are  still  engaged  with  the  skill  and  capital  of  countries  less 
oppressed  with  taxation."  ^ 

But  England  profited  not  only  from  the  genius  of  her 
inventors.  The  long  war  itself  had  greatly  contributed  to 
her  commercial  expansion.  England  had  not  been  invaded; 
her  industries  had  not  been  injured,  their  activity  interrupted 
or  rendered  precarious,  as  had  been  the  case  in  all  the  coun- 
tries of  the  Continent.  She  prospered  both  because  she 
was  unmolested  and  because  they  were  molested,  so  that  they 
were  forced  to  rely  upon  her  for  many  things  which  in  normal 
times  they  would  have  manufactured  for  themselves.  The 
war,  too,  had  given  her  the  command  of  the  seas.  The 
carrying    trade    of    the    world    was    almost    entirely    hers. 


*  Walpole's  History  of  England  since  1815,  I,  GG;  on  the  whole  subject 
of  this  series  of  inventions  and  the  expansion  of  industry  see  Wal- 
pole,  I,  44-67. 

^  Quoted  by  Cheyney,  Readings  in  English  History,  614-615. 


THE  RENOWN  OF  PARLIAMENT  409 

The  material  development  of  England  filled  other  nations 
with  envy.  Her  empire  also  was  commanding  in  its  range 
and  universality.  As  one  after  another  of  the  countries 
of  Europe  became  the  enemy  of  Britain,  she  attacked  its 
colonies.  Thus  at  the  close  of  the  long  war  she  had  en- 
riched herself  with  valuable  possessions,  hitherto  belonging 
to  France  and  Holland.* 

The  proud  position  that  England  held  was  ascribed,  in  The  renown 
the  general  opinion  of  Europe,  to  the  excellence  of  her  °^  Parlia- 
government.  This  government  enjoyed  a  great  reputa- 
tion on  the  Continent.  It  had  remained  erect  throughout 
a  period  when  other  governments,  one  after  another,  had 
collapsed.  It  had  followed  a  uniform,  persistent  policy 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end,  with  a  single  slight  interrup- 
tion, while  the  policy  of  other  nations  had  veered  and 
changed,  and  changed  and  veered  again.  It  seemed  that 
there  must  be  some  peculiar  merit  in  a  system  that  remained 
immutable  in  a  world  of  change.  Europeans  heard  of 
England  as  a  land  of  freedom,  of  representative  government, 
of  local  self-government.  The  renown  of  her  Parliament 
had  filled  the  world.  It  was  known  that  her  Parliament 
was  her  real  ruler,  that  though  the  king  reigned  he  did  not 
govern,  that  the  real  executive  was  the  ministry  of  the  hour, 
that  ministries  rose  and  fell  according  to  the  will  of  Parlia- 
ment. The  fact  that  England  was  so  successful  under  this 
parliamentary  and  cabinet  system  of  government,  which  was 
supposed  to  be  the  mouthpiece  of  the  English  people,  gave 
great  impetus  to  the  demand  for  similar  institutions  on  the 
Continent.  England  was  the  model  to  which  Liberals  and 
reformers  everywhere  were  prone  to  point. 

Yet  on  examination  it  was  seen  that  this  structure  was 
far  from  fair,  that  it  was  honeycombed  with  abuses,  marked 
by  glaring  discriminations  between  social  classes,  that  Eng-  land  of  the 
land  was  a  land  of  privilege,  a  land  of  the  old  regime,  that  Old  Regime 

*  On  general  material  condition  of  Great  Britain  in  1815,  Walpole,  I, 
22-113. 


410    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORJM  BILL  OF  1832 

her  institutions  required  radical  change  to  bring  them  into 

proper  adjustment  with  the  new  age  and  its  ideas.     While 

the  French  across  the  Channel  had,  by  supreme  and  violent 

exertions,   asserted   that  the   modem-  state   must   rest   upon 

the  principle   of  equality,   and  had,  in  order   to   give   that 

principle  definite  lodgment  in  the  facts  of  the  national  life, 

reduced  the  aristocracy  and  humbled  the  church,  in  England 

the  ruling  class  maintained  its  position  unshaken.      England 

remained  a  land  of  the  old  regime  until  1832,  forty  years 

after  the  great  transformation  in  France. 

Commanding      Power  rested  with  the  aristocracy,  composed  of  the  no- 

posi  ion  of     ijjijt-y  jjj^(j  ^}jg  p-entrv.      This  class  largely  controlled  local 

the  nobility.  "^  i  •  i  i        i       i/. 

government  and  local  taxation.  The  "  local  self-govern- 
ment "  of  England,  so  much  praised  and  idealized  abroad, 
as  if  it  were  government  of  the  people  by  the  people,  did 
not  exist.  In  the  counties  the  country  nobility  filled  the 
most  important  offices  in  the  local  governing  boards  and 
in  the  militia.  Smaller  offices  Avere  occupied  by  its  depend- 
ents. In  the  boroughs,  too,  its  influence  was  generally  de- 
cisive with  the  close  corporations  which  controlled  most  of 
them.  Its  power  was  glaringly  apparent  at  the  top,  in 
Parliament.  The  House  of  Lords  was  composed  almost 
exclusively  of  large  landed  proprietors.  This  was  the  in- 
The  House  expugnable  bulwark  of  the  prevailing  social  class.  But  the 
of  Commons.  House  of  Commons  was  also  another  stronghold  hardly 
less  secure.  This  body,  supposed,  as  its  name  shows, 
to  be  representative  of  the  commoners  of  England,  con- 
spicuously belied  its  name.  Its  composition  was  so  extraor- 
dinary that  it  merits  full  description,  particularly  as  the 
great  reform  movement  of  the  next  generation  concerned  it 
primarily,  its  thorough  alteration  being  correctly  felt  to  be 
the  condition  absolutely  precedent  to  all  other  reforms. 
The  system  The  House  of  Commons  in  1815  consisted  of  658  mem- 
of  represen-  ^^^^^ .  ^gg  ^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^,^  returned  by  England,  100  by  Ire- 
land, 45  by  Scotland,  24  by  Wales.  There  were  three 
kinds  of  constituencies — the  counties,  the  boroughs,  and  the 


THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  411 

universities.  In  England  cacli  county  had  two  members, 
and  nearly  all  of  the  boroughs  had  two  each,  though  a  few 
had  but  one.  Representation  had  no  relation  to  the  size 
of  the  population  in  either  case.  A  large  county  and  a 
small  county,  a  large  borough  and  a  small  borough,  had 
the  same  number  of  members.  In  times  past  the  king  had 
possessed  the  right  to  summon  this  town  and  that  to  send 
up  two  burgesses  to  London.  Once  given  that  right  it 
usually  retained  it.  If  a  new  town  should  grow  up,  the 
monarch  might  give  it  the  right,  but  he  was  not  obliged 
to.  Since  1625  only  two  new  boroughs  had  been  created. 
Thus  the  constitution  of  the  House  of  Commons  had 
become  stereotyped  at  a  time  when  population  was  in- 
creasing and  was  also  shifting  greatly  from  old  centers 
to  new.  An  increasing  inequality  in  the  representation 
was  a  feature  of  the  political  system.  Thus  the  county 
and  borough  representation  of  the  ten  southern  counties  of 
England  was  237,  and  of  the  thirty  others  only  252 ;  yet 
the  latter  had  a  population  nearly  three  times  as  large 
as  the  former.  All  Scotland  returned  only  45  members, 
while  the  single  English  county  of  Cornwall  (including  its 
boroughs,  of  course)  returned  44.  Yet  the  population 
of  Scotland  was  eight  times  as  large  as  that  of  Corn- 
wall.^ 

The  suffrage  in  the  counties  was  uniform,  and  was  enjoyed  The   county 
by  those  who  possessed  land  yielding  them  an  income  of  forty  ^ 

shillings  a  year.  But  as  this  worked  out  it  gave  a  very 
restricted  suffrage,  for  England  was  the  land  of  large  estates, 
and  the  tendency  toward  the  absorption  of  small  estates 
in  large  ones  was  steadily  increasing.  The  small  farmer, 
holding  his  land  in  his  own  right,  who  was  so  common  in 
France,  had  become  almost  universally  in  England  a  mere 
tenant  of  a  large  landholder.      Accurate  statistics  are  lack- 

^  These  numbers  include  not  only  the  county  representatives  proper 
but  also  the  representatives  of  the  boroughs  located  in  the  respective 
counties. 


412    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

ing,  but  Gneist  estimates  that  at  least  four-fifths  of  the 
cultivable  land  of  the  United  Kingdom  belonged  to  not 
more  than  7,000  of  the  nobility  and  gentry.  The  county 
voters,  then,  were  chiefly  the  men  who  had  large  country 
estates,  and  not  the  farmers  and  peasantry  who  tilled  them. 
The  county  representation  was  consequently  a  stronghold 
of  the  aristocracy.  Counties  in  which  there  were  so  few 
voters  could  often  be  easily  controlled  by  the  wealthy  land- 
owners. Indeed,  in  many  counties  the  election  of  the  land- 
owners' nominee  was  accepted  as  so  much  a  matter  of  course 
that  there  were  no  opposing  candidates.  In  at  least  three 
counties  there  had  been  no  contest  for  over  a  hundred  years. 
Scotland.  jj^  Scotch  counties  the  condition  was  even  worse.      There 

the  suffrage  was  not  determined  by  ownership  of  land,  but 
by  the  possession  of  a  so-called  "  superiority,"  or  direct 
grant  from  the  crown,  producing  at  least  400  pounds  a 
year.  The  result  was  that  there  were  not  three  thousand 
county  voters  in  all  Scotland;  yet  the  population  of  Scot- 
land was  nearly  two  million.  Fife  had  240  voters,  Crom- 
arty 9.  In  the  county  of  Roxburgh  in  1831  the  result 
of  the  election  was  a  "  great  majority  "  of  40  to  19.  Yet 
that  county  had  a  population  of  more  than  40,000.  The 
climax  was  reached  in  Bute,  where  there  were  21  voters  out 
of  a  population  of  14,000,  only  one  of  whom  lived  in  the 
county.  On  a  certain  occasion  only  one  voter  attended 
the  election  meeting  of  that  county.  He  constituted  him- 
self chairman,  nominated  himself,  called  the  list  of  voters, 
and  declared  himself  returned  to  Parliament. 
The  suffrage  Such  was  the  situation  in  the  counties  of  Great  Britain, 
in  oroug  s.  ^}^j(.]^  returned  186  members  to  the  House  of  Commons. 
But  more  important  were  the  boroughs,  which  returned  467 
members.'  In  the  counties  the  suffrage  was  uniform ;  in 
the  boroughs,  on  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  bewildering 
variety  in  the  methods  whereby  the  right  to  vote  was  se- 
cured.    In  the  boroughs,  too,  the  influence  of  the  landowning 

^  The  universities  returned  5  members. 


BOROUGH  REPRESENTATION  413 

and  wealthy  class  was  even  greater  and  more  decisive  than 
in  the  counties.  The  boroughs  were  of  several  kinds  or  Nomination 
types — nomination  boroughs,  rotten  or  close  boroughs,  bor-  boroughs, 
oughs  in  which  there  was  a  considerable  body  of  voters, 
boroughs  in  which  the  suffrage  wa«  almost  democratic.  It 
was  the  existence  of  the  first  two  classes  that  contributed 
the  most  to  the  popular  demand  for  the  reform  of  the 
House.  In  the  nomination  boroughs,  the  right  to  choose 
the  two  burgesses  was  completely  in  the  hands  of  the  patron. 
Such  places  might  have  lost  all  their  inhabitants,  yet  repre- 
sentation, being  an  attribute  of  geographical  areas  rather 
than  of  population,  these  places  were  still  entitled  to  their 
two  members.  Thus  Corfe  Castle  was  a  ruin.  Old  Sarura 
a  green  mound,  Gatton  was  part  of  a  park,  while  Dun- 
wich  had  long  been  submerged  beneath  the  sea,  yet  these 
places,  entirely  without  inhabitants,  still  had  two  mem- 
bers each  in  the  House,  because  it  had  been  so  decided 
centuries  before,  when  they  did  have  a  population,  and 
because  the  English  Parliament  took  no  account  of  changes. 
Thus  the  owner  of  the  ruined  wall,  or  the  green  mound,  or 
this  particular  portion  of  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  had  the 
right  of  nomination. 

In  the  rotten  or  close  boroughs  the  members  were  elected  Rotten 
by  the  corporation,  that  is,  by  the  mayor  and  aldermen,  do^o^S^s. 
or  the  suffrage  was  in  the  hands  of  voters,  who,  however, 
were  so  few,  from  a  dozen  to  fifty  in  many  cases,^  and 
generally  so  poor  that  the  patron  could  easily  influence 
them  by  bribery  or  intimidation  to  choose  his  candidates. 
Elections  in  such  cases  were  a  mere  matter  of  form.  Wal- 
pole  states  that  in  1793  245  members  were  notoriously 
returned  by  the  influence  of  128  peers.  Thus  peers,  them- 
selves sitting  in  the  House  of  Lords,  had  representatives 
sitting  in  the  other  House.  Lord  Lonsdale  thus  returned 
nine  members,  and  was  known  as  "  premier's  cat-o'-nine- 
tails."     Others  returned  six,  five,  four  apiece.      Some  would 

^  Ninety  members  represented  places  of  less  than  50  voters  each. 


414.    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORJM  BILL  OF  1832 


ITnrepre- 

sented 

cities. 


Bribery. 


sell  their  appointments  to  the  highest  bidder,  and  a  common 
price  was  10,000  pounds  for  two  seats  for  a  single  parlia- 
ment. Borough-mongering  was  common.^  It  was  stated 
in  1817  that  seats  were  bought  and  sold  like  tickets  to  the 
opera.  Thus  at  the  period  at  which  this  history  opens 
a  considerable  majority  of  the  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons  was  returned  through  the  influence  of  a  small 
body  of  patrons.  These  were  noblemen,  or  wealthy  land- 
owners, who  aspired  to  become  noblemen  and  chose  this 
method  of  acquiring  political  power,  that  thus  they  might 
in  the  end  be  raised  to  the  peerage. 

In  the  third  class  of  boroughs,  those  with  a  fairly  large 
electorate,  there  was  much  bribery,  while  the  fourth  class 
of  practically  democratic  boroughs  was  very  small.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  were  large  industrial  cities  with  no 
representation  at  all,  such  as  Manchester,  with  a  popula- 
tion of  140,000,  Birmingham  with  100,000,  Leeds  with 
75,000,  Sheffield  with  about  70,000." 

Bribery,  as  has  been  said,  was  customary.  The  polls 
were  kept  open  for  fifteen  days.  Where  there  were  contests 
the  expenses  were  borne  by  the  candidates.  These  were 
sometimes  enormous.  A  case  is  on  record  in  which  the  two 
candidates  spent  200,000  pounds  in  a  single  election.  Rich 
men  were  willing  to  make  these  vast  expenditures.  For  once 
in  Parliament  they  were  on  the  road  to  political  power  and 
social  eminence.     They  or  their  sons  might  enter  the  peerage, 

*  Some  of  the  most  honorable  and  useful  members  bought  their  seats 
as  the  only  way  of  getting  into  Parliament  on  an  independent  basis, 
though  they  utterly  detested  the  system.  See  the  case  of  Romilly. 
Cheyney,  Readings  in  English  History,  pp.  644-646. 

'  The  salient  fact  about  the  suffrage  in  boroughs  before  1832  is  that 
it  varied  greatly  from  place  to  place.  Molesworth  considers  the  follow- 
ing a  tolerably  complete  list  of  these  qualifications:  "House-holders, 
resident  house-holders,  house-holders  paying  scot  and  lot:  inhabitants, 
resident  inhabitants,  inhabitants  paying  scot  and  lot:  burgesses,  capital 
burgesses,  burgage-holders;  freeholders,  freemen,  resident  freemen;  cor- 
porations, potwallopers,  payers  of  poor  rates."  Molesworth,  History  of 
England,  I,  66  note. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND  415 

and  numerous  sinecures  might  fall  in  the  direction  of  the 
family.  For  this  reason  men  who  were  making  their  fortunes 
in  industry  sought  to  enter  the  class  of  landed  proprietors 
by  purchasing  large  estates.  Thus  the  established  order 
gained  additional  support  in  the  ambition  of  the  newly  aris- 
ing moneyed  class.  Well  might  the  younger  Pitt  exclaim: 
"  This  House  is  not  the  representation  of  the  people  of 
Great  Britain;  it  is  the  representation  of  nominal  boroughs, 
of  ruined  and  exterminated  towns,  of  noble  families,  of 
wealthy  individuals,  of  foreign  potentates."  The  govern- 
ment of  England  was  not  representative,  but  was  oligarchical. 

Closely  identified  with  the  State,  and,  like  the  State,  thor-  The 
oughly  permeated  with  the  principle  of  special  privileges,  ^^^^°  isnea 
was  another  body,  the  Church  of  England.  Though  there 
was  absolute  religious  liberty  in  Great  Britain,  though  men 
might  worship  as  they  saw  fit,  the  position  of  the  Anglican 
Church  was  one  greatly  favored.  Only  members  of  that 
church  possessed  any  real  political  power.  No  Catholic 
could  be  a  member  of  Parliament,  or  hold  any  office  in  the 
state  or  municipality.  In  theory  Protestants  who  dis- 
sented from  the  Anglican  Church  were  likewise  excluded 
from  holding  office.  In  practice,  however,  they  were  enabled 
to,  by  the  device  of  the  so-called  Act  of  Indemnity,  an  act 
passed  each  year  by  Parliament,  pardoning  them  for  having 
held  the  positions  illegally  during  the  year  just  past.  The 
position  of  the  Dissenter  was  both  burdensome  and  humiliat-  Dissenters, 
ing.  He  had  to  pay  taxes  for  the  support  of  the  Church 
of  England,  though  he  did  not  belong  to  it.  He  had  to 
register  his  place  of  worship  with  authorities  of  the 
Church  of  England.  He  could  only  be  married  by  a  clergy- 
man of  that  church,  unless  he  were  a  Quaker  or  a  Jew.  There 
was  no  such  thing  as  civil  marriage,  or  marriage  by  dis- 
senting clergymen.  A  Roman  Catholic  or  a  Dissenter  could 
not  graduate  from  Cambridge,  could  not  even  enter  Ox- 
ford, owing  to  the  religious  tests  exacted,  which  only 
Anglicans  could  meet.     The  natural  result  of  the  supremacy 


416    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Abuses 
within  the 
Church. 


The  people 
neglected. 


of  this  religion  was  that  those  embraced  it  who  were  in- 
fluenced by  self-interest,  who  were  ambitious  for  political 
preferment,  for  social  advancement,  or  for  an  Oxford  or 
Cambridge  education  for  their  sons.  It  was  "  ungentleman- 
like  "  to  be  a  Dissenter. 

Not  only  was  the  Church  of  England  privileged  with 
reference  to  other  churches,  but  within  the  Church  itself 
there  were  great  inequalities.  Bishops  and  archbishops 
received  large  salaries,  ranging  from  ten  to  one  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  dollars  a  year.  These  prizes  went  to 
the  younger  sons  or  proteges  of  the  great  families.  The 
assumption  was,  as  Sir  Leslie  Stephen  says,  that  "  a  man 
of  rank  who  takes  orders  should  be  rewarded  for  his  con- 
descension." On  the  other  hand,  there  were  thousands  of 
parish  clergymen  with  wretchedly  low  salaries.  The  latter 
had  little  chance  of  promotion.  There  were  pluralities 
and  absenteeism  in  this  Church,  exactly  as  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  pre-revolutiohary  France.  The  clergy 
were  eminently  respectable,  but  eminently  worldly,  a  social, 
if  not  a  spiritual,  force  in  the  life  of  England,  an  interested 
bulwark  of  the  established  order. 

The  great  institutions  of  England,  therefore,  were  con- 
trolled by  the  rich,  and  in  the  interest  of  the  rich.  Legis- 
lation favored  the  powerful,  the  landed  nobility,  and  the 
rich  class  of  manufacturers  that  was  growing  up,  whose 
interests  were  similar.  The  immense  mass  of  the  people 
received  scant  consideration.  Their  education  was  woe- 
fully neglected.  Probably  three-fourths  of  the  children  of 
England  did  not  receive  the  slightest  instruction.  Laborers 
were  forbidden  to  combine  to  improve  their  conditions,  which 
the  state  itself  never  dreamed  of  improving.  Even  their 
food  was  made  artificially  dear  by  tariffs  on  breadstuffs 
passed  in  the  interests  of  the  landlords.  The  reverse  side  of 
the  picture  of  English  greatness  and  power  and  prosperity 
was  gloomy  in  the  extreme.  England  was  in  need  of  sweep- 
ing and  numerous  reforms  to  meet  the  demands  of  modern 


CRITICS  OF  ENGLISH  INSTITUTIONS       417 

liberalism,    whetlicr    in    politics,    in    economics,   or   in   social 
institutions. 

The  conditions  just  described  had  not  escaped  challenge. 
In  the  last  quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century,  two  writers  in 
particular,  of  great  vigor  and  originality,  Adam  Smith  and 
Jeremy  Bentham,  had  subjected  English  institutions  and 
policies  to  trenchant  and  damaging  criticism.  Adam  Adam 
Smith  had  published  in  1776  his  "  Wealth  of  Nations,"  ^mith. 
a  comprehensive  condemnation  of  the  prevalent  economic 
theories  and  practices  of  Great  Britain.  He  denounced 
protection  and  defended  free  trade,  and  urged  liberty  in 
the  economic  life  in  place  of  constant  and  minute  govern- 
mental regulation.  Bentham  criticized  government  and  Jeremy 
jurisprudence  and  morals.  Aroused  by  Blackstone's  pane-  ^^^t"*"** 
gyric  of  the  British  Constitution  as  the  perfection  of  human 
wisdom,  he  published  in  1776  a  "  Fragment  on  Govern- 
ment," in  which  he  showed  unsparingly  its  defects.  He 
laid  down  in  this,  and  in  other  books  in  later  years,  the 
principle  that  "  the  greatest  happiness  of  the  greatest  num- 
ber is  the  foundation  of  morals  and  legislation " ;  that 
"  the  end  of  all  government  is  utility,  or  the  good  of  the 
governed."  Obviously,  English  government  was  not  based 
on  any  such  principle.  Bentham  applied  his  principle  of 
utility  to  all  the  institutions  of  England  in  succession — 
the  monarchy,  the  church,  the  courts,  parliament — showing 
how  harmful  rather  than  useful  each  was.  He  was  con- 
structive also,  showing  how  the  grievous  defects  could  be 
remedied. 

The  views   of  Smith  and  Bentham  made  no   impression  Effect  of 

upon  Parliament,  but  they  gradually  influenced  the  rising         French 
.  '  .,11  1  n  Revolution 

generation.        They    contributed    greatly    to    the    reforms        ^^ 

effected  from  about  1825  to  1850.      They  would  probably  England. 

have  been   effective   much   earlier  had   it  not  been   for  the 

French  Revolution,  which,  working  much  good  for  France, 

worked  nothing  but  evil  for  England.     English  conservatism 

became   stiff   and   implacable.       Liberal   demands    must   be 


418    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Economic 
distress 
after  1815 


resisted,  because,  as  any  one  could  see,  they  led  to  anarchy 
and  violence  and  a  Reign  of  Terror.  From  1T93  to  1815 
the  liberal  reformers  of  England  were  silenced  by  the  odium 
attached  to  the  deeds  of  their  French  neighbors.  Salutary 
changes  were  delayed  for  a  whole  generation.  The  Tory 
party,  opposed  to  all  change,  was  assured  of  a  long  lease 
of  power,  one  that  lasted,  indeed,  until  1830. 

The  demand  for  reform  was  resumed,  however,  after  the 
final  victory  over  Napoleon  at  Waterloo,  and  became  more 
and  more  emphatic.  It  drew  its  main  strength  from  the 
deep  and  widespread  wretchedness  of  the  people.  Con- 
trary to  all  expectations,  the  peace  did  not  bring  with  it 
happiness  and  prosperity,  but  rather  intense  suffering  and 
the  hatred  of  class  and  class.  The  reasons  for  this  are 
not  far  to  seek.  As  long  as  war  continued  England  was 
the  manufacturer  and  the  common  carrier  of  the  world. 
Now  that  the  war  was  over  this  practical  monopoly  was 
destroyed,  the  foreign  market  was  restricted  by  the  renewed 
activity  of  European  manufacturers  and  merchants,  who 
could  now  conduct  their  business  in  security.  The  export 
trade  fell  off  rapidly.  Then  the  English  Government  re- 
duced its  expenditures  suddenly  by  one-half,  greatly  injur- 
ing all  those  industries  which  had  furnished  it  the  materials 
of  war.  Thus  manufacturers,  losing  customers  at  home 
and  abroad,  were  forced,  some  into  bankruptcy,  others  to 
curtail  their  activity,  in  other  words,  to  dismiss  thousands 
of  workmen.  And  at  this  very  moment,  when  laborers 
lack  of  em-  were  being  thrown  out  of  employment  or  were  finding  their 
ployment.  ^y^ges  reduced,  their  number  was  being  increased  by  the 
disbandment  of  the  militia  and  the  reduction  in  the  army 
and  navy.  The  navy  alone  was  reduced  from  100,000 
men  in  1815  to  33,000  in  1816.  At  the  time  when  the 
number  of  laborers  was  greater  than  the  demand,  200,000 
or  more  men  were  added  to  the  labor  market.  Furthermore, 
the  next  few  years  saw  a  series  of  bad  harvests.  By  these, 
and  by  the  Corn  Law  of   1815,  bread  was   made   dearer. 


THE  DEMAND  FOR  REFORM  419 

Add  also  the  fact  that  the  modern  industrial  or  factory 
system  was  painfully  supplanting  the  old  system  of  house- 
hold industries  and  temporarily  throwing  multitudes  out 
of  employment,  or  employing  them  under  hard,  even  in- 
human conditions,  and  it  is  not  difficult  to  understand  the 
widespread,  desperate  discontent  of  the  mass  of  the  popu- 
lation. A  Parliament,  organ  of  the  rich  minority,  refused 
to  help  them;  it  even  forbade  them  to  help  themselves,  for 
it  was  a  misdemeanor  for  workmen  to  combine.  If  they 
did,  they  would  be  sent  to  jail.     Labor  was  unorganized. 

The  prevalence  of  such  conditions  naturally  furthered  The  demand 
the  demand  for  reforms,  long  held  in  check  by  the  war. 
Now  that  the  war  was  over,  the  time  seemed  to  have  come 
for  legislation  remedial  of  the  many  abuses  in  English  in- 
stitutions, and  of  the  existing  economic  distress.  But  the 
ministry  and  Parliament  saw  only  danger  in  change,  and 
set  themselves  grimly  against  all  concessions.  The  years 
from  1815  to  1820  are  years  of  repression  and  alarm,  as 
pronounced  in  England  as  in  most  of  the  countries  of 
Europe. 

The  demand  for  reforms  came  primarily  from  the  poor  ■William 
and  disheartened  masses,  who  possessed  a  remarkable  leader  Cobbett. 
in  the  person  of  William  Cobbett,  the  son  of  an  agricultural 
laborer.  For  some  years  Cobbett  had  published  a  liberal 
periodical  called  "  The  Weekly  PoHtical  Register,"  in  which 
he  had  opposed  the  Government.  In  1816  he  reduced  the 
price  of  his  paper  from  a  shilling  to  twopence,  made  his 
appeal  directly  to  the  laboring  class,  and  became  their  guide 
and  spokesman.  The  effect  was  instantaneous.  For  the  first 
time  the  lower  class  had  an  organ,  cheap,  moreover  brilliantly 
written,  for  Cobbett's  literary  ability  was  such  that  a  London 
paper,  the  Standard,  declared  that  for  clearness,  force,  and 
power  of  copious  illustration  he  was  unrivaled  since  the  time 
of  Swift.  Cobbett  was  the  first  great  popular  editor,  who  for 
nearly  thirty  years,  with  but  little  interruption,  expressed  in 
his  weekly  paper  the  wishes  and  the  emotions  of  the  laboring 


420    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

classes.  He  was  a  great  democratic  leader,  a  powerful 
popular  editor,  a  pugnacious  and  venomous  opponent  of 
the  existing  regime,  a  champion  of  the  cause  of  parliamentary 
reform. 
Parliamen-  For  Cobbett  persuaded  the  working  people  that  they  must 
tary  reform,  g^.^^  ^^^  ^^^  ^.^^j^^  ^^  ^^^^  before  they  could  get  social  and 

economic  reforms.  Parliamentary  reform  must  have  prece- 
dence. Let  the  people  get  political  power,  let  them  change 
Parliament  from  the  organ  of  a  narrow  class  into  a  truly 
national  assembly,  and  then  they  could  abolish  the  evils 
from  which  they  suffered,  and  put  useful  statutes  into  force. 
He  demanded,  therefore,  universal  suffrage.  Other  lead- 
ers appeared  also,  and  a  considerable  fermentation  of  ideas 
among  the  unpropertied  and  working  classes  characterized 
these  years. 

Certain  radicals  took  more  active  measures  which  aroused 
disproportionate  alarm  in  the  minds  of  the  ministry,  who 
scented  a  new  French  Revolution  in  every  popular  commo- 
tion, and  were  ready  to  go  to  almost  any  length  to  stamp 
out  the  troublesome  spirit.  The  distress  of  the  masses  led 
Popular  dis-  to  disturbances.  Riots  broke  out  in  1816.  Fann  buildings, 
turbances.  barns,  stacks,  business  premises  were  set  on  fire.  Machines 
were  broken  by  workmen  who  thought  them  the  cause  of  their 
woes.  Obnoxious  tradesmen  were  attacked.  The  ministry, 
thinking  it  necessary  in  the  interests  of  property  to  make 
an  example,  arrested  seventy-three  of  the  wretched  rioters 
of  Ely,  secured  the  condemnation  to  death  of  thirty-four 
of  them,  and  the  actual  execution  of  five.  Such  was  the 
reply  of  the  British  Government  to  the  prevalent  discontent. 
Similar  disturbances  occurred  elsewhere,  and  were  similarly 
suppressed.  A  political  demonstration  of  a  radical  char- 
acter was  held  in  Spa  Fields  in  London  in  the  same  year 
(1816).  The  Government  prosecuted  the  leaders  for 
treason,  but  the  jury  declined  to  convict.  Somewhat  later 
when  the  Prince  Regent  was  returning  from  Parliament, 
where  he  had  declared  that  the  English  electoral   system 


THE  MASSACRE  OF  PETERLOO  421 

was  the  most  perfect  the  world  had  ever  seen,  the  people 
threw  stones  at  his  carriage,  breaking  one  of  its  windows. 

The  legislation  occasioned  by  these  occurrences  was  harshly  Suspension 
repressive.  No  less  grave  a  measure  was  passed  than  one  sus-  °^  Habeas 
pending  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act,  an  act  which  no  Parliament 
in  Great  Britain,  since  that  of  1817,  has  felt  it  necessary 
to  suspend.  An  act  for  the  suppression  of  seditious  meet- 
ings was  hardly  more  defensible.  It  was  the  object  of  this 
bill  to  prevent  political  discussion  by  the  public.  Only  with 
the  special  permission  of  a  magistrate  could  a  debating  club 
meet  or  a  lecture  be  given  or  a  reading  room  be  opened. 
The  ministry  even  declined  to  make  any  exception  of  lectures 
on  medicine,  surgery,  and  chemistry.  Such  legislation  only 
the  gravest  necessity  could  justify,  and  such  necessity  did 
not  exist.  That  it  could  be  used  to  damage  political  oppo- 
nents of  the  existing  ministry  was  soon  made  evident.  The 
suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  drove  Cobbett,  the 
most  aggressive  opponent  of  the  ministry,  into  temporary 
exile. 

Two  years  later  a  more  important  event  occurred  in  Man-  The 
Chester.  A  public  meeting  was  held  in  St.  Peters  Field,  Massacre  of 
August  16,  1819,  for  the  purpose  of  petitioning  for  parlia- 
mentary reform  and  the  redress  of  grievances.  This  meet- 
ing had  been  declared  illegal  by  the  authorities,  yet  the  organ- 
izers had  determined  to  hold  it  nevertheless.  Fifty  thousand 
men,  women,  and  children  came  together  accordingly  to  listen 
to  Hunt,  a  popular  orator.  The  police  attempted  to  arrest 
Hunt  and  the  other  leaders.  The  crowd  closed  in  around 
them,  jeering.  The  magistrates  apparently  lost  their  heads. 
They  ordered  a  body  of  cavalry  and  yeomanry  to  rescue 
the  police.  The  result,  however,  was  that  the  troops  charged 
the  crowd  which  was  unarmed.  There  was  a  scene  of  fear- 
ful confusion ;  several  defenseless  people  were  killed  at  once ; 
many  more  were  injured.  This  so-called  Massacre  of  Peter- 
loo  angered  the  people,  and  in  the  end  furthered  the  agita- 
tion for  reform,  but  the  Government  warmly  approved  the 


422    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


The  Six 
Acts. 


Death  of 
George  III. 


The  dawn 
of  an  era 
of  reform. 


Defiance   of 
the  Holy 
Alliance. 


action  of  the  magistrates  and  induced  Parliament  to 
pass  the  famous  Six  Acts  or  Gag  Laws  which  represent  the 
climax  of  this  sorry  reaction  in  England,  and  which  strin- 
gently restricted  the  freedom  of  speech,  of  the  press,  and  of 
public  meeting,  which  had  long  been  the  boast  of  England. 

Such  was  the  answer  of  the  Tory  aristocracy  under  Lord 
Liverpool  to  the  demands  of  the  discontented  and  distressed. 
No  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  privileged  classes  to  examine 
the  grievances  of  the  people,  to  seek  to  remove  the  causes 
of  the  universal  discontent,  but  only  harsh  and  repressive 
legislation  that  encroached  gravely  upon  the  traditional 
liberties  of  the  British  people.  The  conquerors  of  Napoleon 
were  easily  frightened.  Their  policy  of  coercion  was  suc- 
cessful. The  radical  party  was  silenced.  It  reappeared 
ten  years  later,  however,  and  contributed  immensely  to 
the  cause  of  parliamentary  refonn  which  then  became  irre- 
sistible. 

In  1820  George  III  died  at  the  age  of  eighty-one.  He  had 
for  many  years  been  insane,  and  the  regency  had  been  exer- 
cised by  his  son,  who  now  became  George  IV,  and  who 
reigned  from  1820  to  1830. 

After  1820  a  change  gradually  came  over  the  political 
life  of  England.  The  Tory  party  still  retained  its  great 
majority  in  Parliament,  but  it  showed  a  tendency  toward 
liberalism.  With  returning  prosperity  after  the  resump- 
tion of  specie  payments  in  1819,  the  disturbances  of  the  last 
few  years  ceased,  and  the  panic,  into  which  the  governing 
classes  had  been  thrown  by  the  French  Revolution,  passed 
away.  Several  of  the  more  reactionary  members  of  the 
ministry  died  or  resigned,  and  their  places  were  taken  by 
men  of  a  younger  and  more  liberal  generation.  Canning, 
Peel,  and  Huskisson  made  the  Tory  party  an  engine  of 
partial  reform.  Under  Canning,  as  Foreign  Secretary  from 
1822,  England  assumed  the  position  that  each  nation  is 
free  to  determine  its  own  form  of  government,  a  doctrine 
opposed  to  that  of  the  Holy  Alliance  of  the  right  of  inter- 


THE  DAWN  OF  LIBERALISM  423 

vention  in  the  affairs  of  other  states  whose  acts  might  be 
thought  to  imperil  the  principle  of  monarchy.  Canning  freed 
England  from  all  connection  with  the  Holy  Alliance.  He 
recognized  the  independence  of  the  Spanish  colonies  in 
America.  If  Spain  could  reconquer  them  she  might.  But 
no  foreign  country,  declared  Canning,  should  subdue  them 
for  her.  "  I  called  the  New  World  in,"  he  said,  "  to  re- 
dress the  balance  of  the  Old."  The  main  significance  of 
Canning's  administration  of  the  Foreign  Office  is  that  at 
least  one  of  the  great  powers  with  boldness  and  success 
defied  the  smug  and  timorous  reactionary  policy  of  the 
absolute  monarchies  of  the  Continent.  Similar  interven- 
tions in  Portuguese  and  Greek  affairs  served  the  cause  of 
liberalism  in  those  countries. 

While  Canning  was  making  England's  foreign  policy  more  Economic 
liberal,  Huskisson  was  introducing  greater  liberty  into  com-  reforms, 
merce  by  carrying  bills  in  1823  altering  the  Navigation 
Laws,  which  threw  restrictions  about  the  carrying  trade, 
and  by  reducing  the  duties  on  many  articles  of  import. 
This  was  not  free  trade,  but  it  was  a  step  in  that  direction. 
The  more  strongly  protected  interests  maintained  their 
ground  for  a  generation  longer.  When  Huskisson  began 
his  reforms  about  1,500  Acts  of  Parliament  regulated  the 
administration  of  the  tariff  system;  the  number  was  now 
reduced  to  eleven,  thus  greatly  simplifying  that  department. 

Another  important  reform  of  these  years  was  that  of  the  The  Penal 
Penal  Code.  The  code  then  prevailing  was  a  disgrace  to 
England,  and  placed  her  far  behind  France  and  other  coun- 
tries. There  was  a  crying  need  for  reform.  The  punish- 
ment of  death  could  be  legally  inflicted  for  about  two  hun- 
dred offenses — for  picking  a  man's  pocket,  for  stealing  five 
shillings  from  a  store,  or  forty  shillings  from  a  dwelling 
house,  for  stealing  a  fish,  for  injuring  Westminster  Bridge, 
for  sending  threatening  letters,  for  making  a  false  entry 
in  a  marriage  register.^ 

*  Walpole,  11,  140-1,  footnote,  gives  a  partial  list  of  these  offenses. 


424    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Heformed 
by  Sir 
Robert  Peel, 


Religious 
inequality. 


The 

religious 
disabilities 
of  Dis- 
senters. 


This  code,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  was  not  enforced.  It  was 
shown,  for  instance,  that  in  the  twelve  years,  from  1805  to 
1817,  655  persons  had  been  indicted  for  stealing  five  shillings 
from  a  shop.  Of  these  113  had  been  sentenced  to  death, 
but  the  sentence  had  not  been  carried  into  effect  in  a  single 
instance.  While  this  was  an  evidence  that  the  humane 
feeling  of  the  age  condemned  the  law  and  would  not  enforce 
it,  still  the  code,  by  its  very  harshness,  tended  to  encourage 
indifference  to  law.  Two  great  reformers,  Romilly  and 
Mackintosh,  had  labored  for  fifteen  years  to  persuade  Parlia- 
ment to  alter  this  barbarous  code,  but  with  only  disheartening 
results.  But  now  Sir  Robert  Peel  took  up  the  reform,  and 
proposed  and  carried,  in  1823,  the  abolition  of  the  death 
penalty  in  about  a  hundred  cases.  The  Tory  party  now 
accepted  proposals  it  had  previously  fiercely  combatted. 
It  is  a  curious  fact  that  even  before  this  more  humane  policy 
was  adopted' with  reference  to  the  misdeeds  and  weaknesses 
of  men,  a  law  for  the  prevention  of  cruelty  to  animals,  the 
first  of  its  kind,  had  been  passed  (1822). 

Another  reform  of  these  years  no  less  significant  lay  in  the 
direction  of  greater  religious  liberty.  In  1815  there  was 
in  England  religious  freedom  but  not  religious  equality. 
People  might  worship  as  they  saw  fit.  Nevertheless,  as  we 
have  seen,  men  paid  a  penalty  for  belonging  to  any  other 
than  the  established  Church  of  England.  Political  priv- 
ileges were  conditioned  upon  creed.  It  has  been  only  by  a 
series  of  acts  passed  in  the  nineteenth  century  that  England 
has  thrown  open  her  political  life  to  all,  irrespective  of 
church  connections  or  religious  beliefs  or  professions.  The 
first  step  taken  was  the  removal  of  the  disabilities  from  which 
Protestant  Dissenters  suffered.  These  were  imposed  by  the 
so-called  Test  and  Corporation  Acts.  These  acts,  put  upon 
the  statute  book  at  a  time  when  there  was  grave  fear  of  a 
violent  assault  upon  Protestantism,  had  been  intended  to 
destroy  the  political  power  of  the  Catholics.  As  a  qualifica- 
tion  for  holding  most   offices,   municipal   and  national,   the 


REMOVAL  OF  RELIGIOUS  DISABILITIES    425 

sacrament  must  be  received  according  to  the  rites  of  the 
Anglican  Church,  and  the  oaths  of  supremacy  and  allegiance 
taken.  The  Test  Act  required  a  declaration  against  transub- 
stantiation.  Though  these  acts  were  designed  to  exclude 
Catholics,  they  went  further  and  excluded  as  well  Dissenters 
generally.  Yet  with  singular  inconsistency  Dissenters  were 
permitted  to  be  members  of  Parliament,  and  thus  to  partici- 
pate in  the  making  of  the  laws  of  England.  For  a  long  time, 
however,  they  did  not  vigorously  object  to  the  injustice 
and  inconvenience  which  they  suffered,  inasmuch  as  they 
hated  and  feared  Catholics  more  than  they  coveted  political 
power,  and  believed  that  the  repeal  of  the  Test  Act  would 
inevitably  lead  to  the  emancipation  of  the  Catholics,  which 
they  did  not  wish  to  see.  Moreover,  as  has  been  already 
stated,  a  convenient  device  was  made  to  fit  their  case.  They 
were,  as  a  matter  of  practice,  permitted  to  hold  office,  though 
in  so  doing  they  were  lawbreakers.  Then  Parliament  would 
pass  an  act  of  indemnity  pardoning  them  for  what  they  had 
done.  This  had  for  a  long  while  been  the  established  custom ; 
consequently  the  Test  Act  no  longer  operated  to  the  exclusion 
of  Dissenters  from  office,  but  was  only  a  badge  of  religious 
inferiority.  In  1828  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  were  Repeal  of 
repealed  as  being  no  longer  in  harmony  with  the  age  or  *^®  -^^^^ 
with  the  wishes  of  Dissenters.  Henceforth  every  person  on  cornoration 
entering  upon  office  must  make  a  declaration  "  on  the  true  Acts, 
faith  of  a  Christian  "  that  he  would  not  use  his  authority 
in  any  way  against  the  Established  Church.  These  words 
had  the  effect  of  excluding  Jews  from  office,  thereby  occa- 
sioning in  the  years  to  come  a  new  agitation  and  a  new  reform. 
Thus  the  monopoly  of  the  Church  had  in  one  particular 
been  broken.  The  repeal  of  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts 
was  an  act  of  complete  justice  to  Protestant  Nonconform- 
ists, but  of  only  partial  justice  to  Roman  Catholics.  Though  Catholic 
the  latter  could  now  hold  most  offices  they  were  still  ex-  disabilities, 
eluded  from  Parliament,  for  their  exclusion  from  Parliament 
depended  not  on  the  Test  Act  but  upon  an  act  passed  in 


426    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

1679,  and  which  was  still  in  force,  requiring  all  members  of 
Parliament  to  take  the  oath  of  supremacy  and  to  make  a 
declaration  against  transubstantiation  and  the  adoration  of 
the  Virgin  Mary.  Thus,  while  after  the  repeal  of  the  Test 
Act  in  1828,  Catholics  might  be  appointed  to  municipal  and 
national  offices,  they  might  not  sit  in  either  House  of  Parlia- 
ment. They  were  not  upon  an  equality  with  Protestants  in 
political  matters,  and  had  no  share  in  the  legislation  of  the 
empire.  Moreover,  their  position  was  anomalous  and  con- 
tradictory. In  Ireland  all  forty  shilling  freeholders  pos- 
sessed the  suffrage.  Thus  a  large  number  of  Catholics  could 
vote  for  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  but  practically 
they  could  only  vote  for  Protestants,  as  Protestants  alone 
would  subscribe  to  the  oath  and  declaration  required  of  all 
members.  Nevertheless  it  was  not  illegal  for  Catholics  to  vote 
for  one  of  their  own  faith  and  elect  him.  They  would,  of 
course,  be  throwing  away  their  suffrage  as  such  a  person 
would  certainly,  for  the  reason  given,  not  be  permitted  to 
take  his  seat. 
Catholic  Catholic  Emancipation,  as  the  removal  of  these  disabilities 

Emancipa-  ^^^^  called,  had  for  forty  years  been  a  prominent  question 
in  English  politics.  Some  of  the  great  statesmen  of  Eng- 
land had  tried  to  solve  it  favorably  to  Catholic  claims, 
notably  Pitt  and  Canning,  but  without  success,  owing  to 
the  prevalent  bigotry.  George  III  and  George  IV  were 
violently  opposed,  George  III  declaring  that  he  should 
reckon  any  man  his  personal  enemy  who  should  propose 
any  measure  of  relief,  and  they  were  supported  by  the  more 
conservative  Tories.  The  question  entered  upon  the  acute 
stage  in  1828.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  was  prime  min- 
ister and  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  the  most  important  member 
of  the  cabinet.  Both  were  opposed  on  principle  to  Catholic 
emancipation.  The  ministry  wished  to  postpone  all  dis- 
cussion of  the  question.  But  events  were  just  then  occur- 
ring in  Ireland  which  would  have  rendered  further  postpone- 
ment of  the  settlement  an  act  of  sheer  madness.    An  agitation, 


CATHOLIC  EMANCIPATION  427 

widesweeping  and  portentous,  convulsed  this  long  suffering 
people.  A  man  of  remarkable  powers  of  leadership  had 
arisen  and  had  forced  the  crisis.  Daniel  O'Connell  is  one  Daniel 
of  the  most  extraordinary  men  in  Irish  history.  A  thrilling  O'Connell. 
orator  and  a  shrewd  and  energetic  lawyer  he  could  inflame 
vast  multitudes  of  men,  yet  could  lead  them  safely  past  snares 
and  pitfalls.  Believing  that  Ireland  could  only  obtain 
justice  by  an  overwhelming  display  of  force  he  founded  the. 
Catholic  Association  to  advocate  Catholic  claims.  This 
soon  became  so  powerful  a  political  body  as  to  alarm  the 
Government.  A  law  was  accordingly  passed  in  1825  order- 
ing its  dissolution.  The  law  was  from  the  start  a  dead 
letter.  The  Association,  dissolved,  immediately  reappeared 
in  another  form.  Monster  meetings  were  held,  where  the 
witchery  of  O'Connell's  oratory  was  displayed  and  his 
marvelous  power  of  control  of  an  excitable  and  injured 
people  conspicuously  manifested.  These  monster  demon- 
strations were  marked  by  no  excesses.  They  constituted  an 
indignant  and  resolute  protest  against  unfair  legislation. 
O'Connell  now  decided  upon  an  act  so  bold  that  he  believed 
it  would  mean  the  end  of  the  agitation.  A  vacancy  occurred 
in  the  parliamentary  representation  from  the  county  of 
Clare.     O'Connell  decided  to  be  a  candidate.     He  was  tri-  O'Connell 

umphantly  elected.     He  was  a  Catholic,  therefore  debarred  ^l^*'*^*^  *o 

.  Parliament, 

by  the  laws  from  membership.     The  electors  voted  for  him 

despite  the  fact  that  they  were  throwing  their  votes  away. 

They  aimed  to  produce  a  moral  effect  and  they  succeeded. 

It  was  evident  that  O'Connell   could  be   similarly   returned 

in  almost  every  other  county  in  Ireland  should  the  occasion 

occur,  that  the  people  were  in  earnest,  and  united.     It  was 

the  fear  that  this  was  the  attitude  of  a  united  people  on 

the  very  brink   of  a   revolt  rather  than   any   sense   of  the 

justice  of  the  cause  that  prompted  Wellington  and  Peel  to 

bring  in  the  famous  Emancipation  Bill,  to  force  it  through  an 

unwilling  Parliament,  and  to  impose  it  upon  an  unwilling 

King.     Wellington  candidly  admitted  that  he  was  driven  to 


428    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Emancipa- 
tion carried 


The 

restriction 
of  the 
suffrage    in 
Ireland. 


Tory 

opposition 
to  the 
reform 
of    Parlia- 
ment. 


this  step  bj  fear  of  civil  war.  George  IV  felt,  as  he  afterward 
said,  like  a  person  with  a  pistol  at  his  breast.  Like  most 
persons  in  such  a  predicament  he  yielded  (1829).  Catholics 
were  henceforth  admitted  to  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  and 
with  a  few  exceptions  they  might  now  fill  any  municipal  and 
state  office.  The  act  established  real  political  equality  be- 
tween Catholics  and  Protestants. 

But  at  the  very  time  that  Catholics  were  given  the  right 
to  sit  in  Parliament,  they  were  in  large  majority  deprived 
of  the  suffrage,  for  the  property  qualification  for  voters  in 
Ireland  was  raised  from  forty  shillings  to  two  hundred. 
Thus  in  removing  one  grievance  a  new  one  was  created, 
certainly  an  ineffective  method  of  pacifying  Ireland.  One 
hundred  and  ninety  thousand  forty-shilling  freeholders  were 
disfranchised  offhand.  It  is  to  be  said,  however,  that  this 
Tory  Parliament  would  not  have  consented  to  Catholic 
Emancipation  had  it  not  known  beforehand  that  this  blow 
would  be  dealt  to  democracy. 

The  reforms  that  have  just  been  described  were  carried 
through  by  the  Tory  party.  There  was  one  reform,  how- 
ever, more  fundamental  and  important,  which  it  was  clear  that 
that  party  would  never  concede,  the  reform  of  Parliament 
itself.  The  significant  features  of  the  parliamentary  system 
have  already  been  described.  That  they  required  profound 
alteration  had  been  held  by  many  of  the  Whigs  for  more  than 
fifty  years.  But  the  Whigs  had  been  powerless  to  effect 
anything,  having  long  been  in  the  minority.  A  combination 
of  circumstances,  however,  now  brought  about  the  downfall 
of  the  party  so  long  dominant,  and  rendered  possible  the 
great  reform.  George  IV  died  on  June  26,  1830,  and  was 
succeeded  by  his  brother  Wilham  IV  (1830-1837).  The 
death  of  the  monarch  necessitated  a  new  election  of  Par- 
liament. Many  of  the  influential  Tory  politicians,  indig- 
nant that  Wellington  and  Peel  had  consented  to  the 
emancipation  of  the  Catholics,  wished  to  punish  their  leaders 
by   sending   up   members    to   the   Commons   who   would   be 


INFLUENCE  OF  REVOLUTION  OF  1830      429 

opposed  to  them.     Wellington's  foreign  policy  increased  the 

unpopularity  of  the  ministry.     Moreover,  just  at  this  time 

the  distress  of  the  working  classes  was  great,  and  they  were 

demanding  parliamentary  reform  with  renewed  vigor.     Sud-  Influence   of 

denlv  the  French  Revolution  of  1830  occurred.     It  exerted  „      ,  ^. 
•^  _  ,      Revolution 

a  great  influence  in  England.  To  the  distressed  and  dis-  ^f  i830. 
contented  it  was  an  encouragement  to  further  activity. 
But  its  influence  upon  the  well-to-do  middle  class  was  more 
important  as  it  proved  that  great  changes  could  be 
eff'ected  without  bringing  social  anarchy  in  their  train. 
Thus  the  specter  of  revolution  that  had  haunted  the  imag- 
ination of  the  solid,  conservative  class  of  Englishmen  was 
finally  laid  by  a  revolution  both  reasonably  orderly  and  most 
salutary.  This  class  was  no  longer  unwilling  to  co-operate 
with  the  working  people.  It  now  took  up  with  energy  the 
demand  for  reform. 

The  elections  of  1830,  held  under  such  circumstances, 
resulted  in  a  Tory  loss  of  fifty  members  in  the  Commons. 
Though  that  party  still  had  a  majority  it  was  not  likely 
to  last  long,  as  many  Tories  were  opposed  to  Wellington. 
Parliament  met  in  November  1830,  and  the  question  of  re- 
form was  immediately  introduced.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  The  Duke 
showed  his  position  by  a  remarkable  eulogy  of  the  English  ^^  Welling- 
Parliament  as  one  which  "  answered  all  the  good  purposes  j-gfoj-j^ 
of  legislation,  and  this  to  a  greater  degree  than  any  legisla- 
ture had  ever  answered,  in  any  country  whatever,"  that  it 
possessed  and  deservedly  possessed  "  the  full  and  entire  con- 
fidence of  the  country."  He  would  go  still  further  and  say 
"  that  if  at  the  present  moment  he  had  imposed  upon  him 
the  duty  of  forming  a  legislature  for  any  country — and 
particularly  for  a  country  like  this,  in  possession  of  great 
property  of  various  descriptions — he  did  not  mean  to  assert 
that  he  could  form  such  a  legislature  as  they  possessed  now, 
for  the  nature  of  man  was  incapable  of  reaching  such  ex- 
cellence at  once,  but  his  great  endeavor  would  be  to  form 
some  description  of  legislature  which  would  produce  the  same 


430    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Fall   of  the 

Tory 

ministry. 


The   First 

Reform 

Bill. 


Provisions. 


results."  Under  these  circumstances  he  would  himself  never 
bring  forward  any  measure  changing  that  system,  but  he 
"  should  always  feel  it  his  duty  to  resist  such  measures  when 
proposed  by  others."  ^ 

The  result  of  this  speech,  which  was  entirely  sincere  but 
seemed  the  very  abdication  of  the  intellect,  was  to  arouse  such 
widespread  indignation  that  the  Wellington  ministry  was 
shortly  swept  from  office,  and  the  Whigs  came  in.  Thus 
was  broken  the  control  the  Tory  party  had  exercised  with 
one  slight  interruption  for  forty-six  years. 

Earl  Grey,  who  for  forty  years  had  demanded  parlia- 
mentary reform,  now  became  prime  minister,  A  ministry 
was  formed  with  ease,  and  included  many  able  men,  Durham, 
Russell,  Brougham,  Palmerston,  Stanley,  Melbourne,  and  on 
March  1,  1831,  a  Reform  Bill  was  introduced  in  the  House 
of  Commons  by  Lord  John  Russell,  It  aimed  to  effect  a 
redistribution  of  seats  on  a  more  equitable  plan,  and  the 
establishment  of  a  uniform  franchise  for  boroughs  in  place 
of  the  great  and  absurd  variety  of  franchises  then  existing. 
The  redistribution  of  seats  was  based  on  two  principles,  the 
withdrawal  of  the  right  of  representation  from  small,  de- 
cayed boroughs,  and  its  bestowal  upon  large  and  wealthy 
towns  hitherto  without  it. 

Accordingly  the  bill  proposed  to  deprive  all  boroughs 
having  a  population  of  less  than  2,000  of  their  separate 
representation  in  Parliament;  to  deprive  all  boroughs  of  less 
than  4,000  inhabitants  of  one  of  their  two  members.  It 
was  estimated  that  110  boroughs  would  be  affected,  and  that 
168  seats  would  be  abolished,^  The  ministry  proposed  that 
these  should  be  given  to  the  counties  and  the  great  unrepre- 


*  Quoted  in  May,  Const,  Hist,  of  Eng.,  I,  331-332.  Kendall,  Source 
Book  of  English  History,  No.  129. 

^  The  list  read  by  Lord  John  Russell  of  the  boroughs  which  it  was 
proposed  wholly  or  partially  to  disfranchise,  with  the  number  of  voters 
and  "  the  prevailing  influence  "  of  each,  that  is  the  landowner,  who  had 
practical  control,  may  be  found  in  Molesworth,  Hist,  of  Eng.,  I,  70-73; 
also,  in  part,  in  Cheyney,  Readings  in  English  History,  686-688. 


INTRODUCTION  OF  REFORM  BILL  4S1 

sented  boroughs.  The  bill  amazed  the  House  by  its  thor- 
oughgoing character  and  encouraged  the  reformers.  Neither 
side  had  expected  so  sweeping  a  change.  The  introduction 
of  the  bill  precipitated  a  remarkable  parliamentary  discus- 
sion, which  continued  with  some  intervals  for  over  fifteen 
months,  from  March  1,  1831,  to  June  5,  1832. 

Lord  John  Russell  in  his  introduction  of  the  measure,  lord  John 
after  stating  that  the  theory  of  the  British  Constitution  B-ussell's 
was  no  taxation  without  representation,  and  after  showing 
that  in  former  times  Parliament  had  been  truly  representa- 
tive, said  that  it  was  no  longer  so.  "  A  stranger  who  was 
told  that  this  country  is  unparalleled  in  wealth  and  industry, 
and  more  civilized  and  more  enlightened  than  any  country 
was  before  it — that  it  is  a  country  that  prides  itself  on  its 
freedom,  and  that  once  in  every  seven  years  it  elects  repre- 
sentatives from  its  population  to  act  as  the  guardians  and 
preservers  of  that  freedom — would  be  anxious  and  curious 
to  see  how  that  representation  is  formed,  and  how  the  people 
choose  their  representatives,  to  whose  faith  and  guardian- 
ship they  entrust  their  free  and  liberal  institutions.  Such 
a  person  would  be  very  much  astonished  if  he  were  taken  to 
a  ruined  mound  and  told  that  that  mound  sent  two  repre- 
sentatives to  Parliament;  if  he  were  taken  to  a  stone  wall 
and  told  that  three  niches  in  it  sent  two  representatives  to 
Parliament ;  if  he  were  taken  to  a  park  where  no  houses  were 
to  be  seen,  and  told  that  that  park  sent  two  representatives 
to  Parliament.  But  if  he  were  told  all  this,  and  were  aston- 
ished at  hearing  it,  he  would  be  still  more  astonished  if  he 
were  to  see  large  and  opulent  towns,  full  of  enterprise  and 
industry  and  intelligence,  containing  vast  magazines  of  every 
species  of  manufactures,  and  were  then  told  that  these  towns 
sent  no   representatives  to  Parliament." 

Lord  John  Russell  estimated  that  the  electorate  would  be 
enlarged  by  about  a  half  a  million  additional  voters  by  this 
measure,  for  it  proposed  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  as 
well  as  the  redistribution  of  seats. 


432    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

Sir  Robert         Tlie  first  man  who  arose  to  oppose  the  bill  was  the  repre- 

"^^^^  sentative  of  the  University   of  Oxford,   Sir  Robert   Infflis, 

speech  .    .  *'  .  &     » 

who  represented  the  opinions  and  prejudices  of  the  country 
gentlemen  so  vitally  affected  by  the  measure.  He  denied 
flatly  that  the  population  of  a  town  had  ever  had  anything 
to  do  with  its  representation  or  that  representation  and 
taxation  were  in  any  way  connected  in  the  British  Constitu- 
tion. "  Can  the  noble  lord  show  that  any  town  or  borough 
has  been  called  into  parliamentary  existence  because  it  was 
large  or  populous,  or  excluded  from  it  because  it  was  small? 
The  noble  lord  has  tried  to  make  much  of  the  instance  of 
Old  Sarum.  In  one  and  the  same  year,  the  23rd  Edward  I, 
a  writ  was  issued  to  both  Old  and  New  Sarum,  and  in  neither 
case  was  it  conferred  on  account  of  population  or  taxation. 
On  the  contrary,  I  believe  it  was  given,  in  the  first  instance, 
to  oblige  some  Earl  of  Salisbury  by  putting  his  friends  into 
the  House.  And  in  an  account  of  the  borough  it  was  stated 
that  it  had  lately  been  purchased  by  Mr.  Pitt,  the  possessor 
of  the  celebrated  diamond  of  that  name,  who  has  attained 
an  hereditary  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons  as  much  as 
the  Earl  of  Arundel  possessed  one  in  the  House  of  Peers 
by  being  the  owner  of  Arundel  Castle.  How  then  can  it  be 
said  that,  according  to  the  constitution  of  the  country  noble- 
men are  not  to  be  represented  and  their  interests  regarded 
in  this  House.  ...  It  is  in  vain  after  this  to  talk  of  the 
purity  of  representation  in  former  times.  I  defy  the  noble 
Representa-  lord  to  point  out  at  any  time  when  the  representation  was 

tion  never     j^g^ter  than  it  is  at  present.     I  say,  therefore,  that  what  is 
better.  ^        .  •^'  ' 

proposed  is  not  restorative.     The  House  and  the  country 

may  judge  what  it  is,  but  I  will  state  in  one  word  that  it  is 

Revolution,  a  revolution  that  will  overturn  all  the  natural 

influence  of  rank  and  property."     Sir  Robert  proceeded  to 

show  that  some  of  the  greatest  men  in  parliamentary  annals 

had  entered  the  House  as  representatives  of  these  nomination 

and  close  boroughs,  the  elder  Pitt,  who  sat  indeed  for  this 

very  Old  Sarum,  which  was  to  be  embalmed  as  a  classic  in 


DEBATES  ON  REFORM  BILL       433 

these  debates,  the  younger  Pitt,  Burke,  Canning,  Fox,  that 
tlius  thej  had  a  chance  to  show  their  talents  and  were  later 
chosen  the  representatives  of  large  towns.  But  no  such 
towns  would  ever  have  chosen  them  had  they  not  previously 
had  this  opportunity  to  prove  their  ability.  "  It  is  only  by 
this  means  that  young  men  who  are  unconnected  by  birth 
or  residence  with  large  towns  can  ever  hope  to  enter  this 
House  unless  they  are  cursed — I  will  call  it  cursed — with 
that  talent  of  mob  oratory  which  is  used  for  the  purpose 
of  influencing  the  lowest  and  most  debasing  passions  of  the 
people." 

Hunt,  one  of  the  radical  leaders,  former  hero  of  the  field  Hunt's 
of  Peterloo,  and  now  a  member  of  the  House,  took  part  in  ^P®^° 
the  debate.  "How  is  this  House  constituted.''"  he  asked, 
"How  are  many  honorable  members  elected.''  Look  at  the 
borough  of  Ilchester  and  the  boroughs  of  Lancashire  and 
Cornwall,  and  see  what  classes  of  men  return  members  to  this 
House.  I  will  tell  the  House  a  fact  which  has  come  to  my 
knowledge,  and  which  bears  on  that  particular  point.  In 
the  borough  of  Ilchester  .  .  .  many  of  the  voters  are 
of  the  most  degraded  and  lowest  class,  who  can  neither 
read  nor  write,  and  who  always  take  care  to  contract  debts 
to  the  amount  of  £35  previous  to  an  election,  because  they 
know  that  those  debts  will  be  liquidated  for  them.  Is  that, 
then,  the  class  of  men  which  the  House  is  told  represents  the 
property  of  the  country.''  I  am  one  who  thinks  that  this 
House  ought  to  be  what  it  professes  to  be — the  Commons 
House  of  Parliament,  representing  the  feelings  and  interest 
of  all  the  common  people  of  England." 

Another  member.  Sir  C.  Wetherell,  denounced  the  pro- 
posed loss  of  their  positions  by  168  members  as  "  corpora- 
tion robbery,"  as  a  new  Pride's  purge,  as  an  imitation  of  the 
illegalities  of  the  Cromwellian  period,  as  republican  in  prin- 
ciple, "  destructive  of  all  property,  of  all  right,  of  all 
privilege." 

Sir  Robert  Peel  pointed  out  that  the  close  boroughs  not 


434    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 


Sir  Robert 

Peel's 

criticism. 


Macaulay 
on  the 
Bill. 


onl}^  brought  out  young  talent  that  otherwise  could  get  no 
opportunity  to  show  itself,  but  that  they  furnished  refuges 
for  distinguished  members,  who  by  some  caprice  of  fortune 
had  lost  their  hold  upon  their  constituencies — and  that  thus 
these  men  could  continue  in  the  service  of  the  nation. 
"  During  150  years  the  constitution  in  its  present  form  has 
been  in  force;  and  I  would  ask  any  man  who  hears  me  to 
declare  whether  the  experience  of  history  has  produced  any 
form  of  government  so  calculated  to  promote  the  happiness 
and  secure  the  rights  and  liberties  of  a  free  and  enlightened 
people."  Stanley,  later  Lord  Derby,  replying  to  the  con- 
tention that  the  nomination  boroughs  opened  an  opportunity 
to  very  able  men  to  enter  Parliament  who  might  not  find  any 
other  way,  said,  "  Whatever  advantage  might  be  derived 
from  this  mode  of  admission  would  be  more  than  balanced 
by  this  disadvantage — that  the  class  of  persons  thus  intro- 
duced would,  whatever  may  be  their  talents  and  acquire- 
ments, not  be  looked  upon  by  the  people  as  representatives." 

Macaulay  delivered  a  speech  on  the  second  day  of  the 
debate  that  made  his  reputation  as  one  of  the  foremost 
orators  of  the  House.  Replying  to  Sir  Robert  Inglis  he  said, 
"  My  honorable  friend  .  .  .  challenges  us  to  show  that 
the  constitution  was  ever  better  than  it  is.  Sir,  we  are 
legislators,  not  antiquaries.  The  question  for  us  is,  not 
whether  the  constitution  was  better  formerly,  but  whether 
we  can  make  it  better  now.''  "  Shall  "  a  hundred  drunken 
potwallopers  in  one  place,  or  the  owner  of  a  ruined  hovel 
in  another,"  be  invested  with  powers  "  which  are  withheld 
from  cities  renowned  to  the  furthest  ends  of  the  earth  for 
the  marvels  of  their  wealth  and  of  their  industry.''"  "But 
these  great  cities,  says  my  honorable  friend  .  .  .  are 
virtually,  though  not  directly,  represented.  Are  not  the 
wishes  of  Manchester,  he  asks,  as  much  consulted  as  those 
of  any  town  which  sends  members  to  Parliament?  Now, 
Sir,  I  do  not  understand  how  a  power  which  is  salutary 
when    exercised    virtually    can    be    noxious    when    exercised 


DEFEAT  OF  THE  REFORM  BILL  435 

directly.  If  the  wislies  of  Manchester  have  as  much  weight 
with  us  as  they  would  have  under  a  system  which  should 
give  representatives  to  Manchester,  how  can  there  be  any 
danger  in  giving  representatives  to  Manchester?  "  Refer- 
ring to  the  utility  of  the  close  boroughs  as  affording  careers 
to  men  of  talent  he  said  that  "  we  must  judge  of  the  form 
of  government  by  its  general  tendency,  not  by  happy  acci- 
dents," and  that  if  "  there  were  a  law  that  the  hundred  tallest 
men  in  England  should  be  members  of  Parliament,  there  would 
probably  be  some  able  men  among  those  who  would  come 
into  the  House  by  virtue  of  this  law." 

Thus  the  debate  went  on,  an  unusual  number  of  members  Ministry 

participating.     But  the  bill  did  not  have  long  to  live.     The  defeated, 

P  3.  rl  i  3,  111  c  n  t 
Opposition  was  persistent,  and  on  April  19th  the  ministry  dissolved 

was  defeated  on  an  amendment.  It  resolved  to  appeal  to  the 
people.  Parliament  was  dissolved  and  a  new  election 
ordered.  This  election  took  place  in  the  summer  of  1831 
amid  the  greatest  excitement  and  was  one  of  the  most  momen- 
tous of  the  century.  From  one  end  of  the  land  to  the  other 
the  cry  was,  "  The  bill,  the  whole  bill,  and  nothing  but  the 
bill."  There  was  some  violence  and  intimidation  of  voters, 
and  bribery  on  a  large  scale  was  practised  on  both  sides. 
The  question  put  the  candidates  was,  "  Will  you  support  the 
bill  or  will  you  oppose  it?  "  The  result  of  the  election  was  an 
overwhelming  victory  for  the  reformers. 

On  June  24,  1831,  Lord  John  Russell  introduced  the  Second 
second  Reform  Bill,  which  was  practically  the  same  as  the 
first.  The  Opposition  did  not  yield,  but  fought  it  inch  by 
inch.  They  tried  to  wear  out  the  ministry  by  making 
dilatory  motions  and  innumerable  speeches  which  necessarily 
consisted  of  mere  repetition.  In  the  course  of  two  weeks 
Sir  Robert  Peel  spoke  forty-eight  times,  Croker  fifty-seven 
times,  Wetherell  fifty-eight  times.  However,  the  bill  was 
finally  passed,  September  22nd,  by  a  majority  of  106.  It 
was  then  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  where  it  was  quickly  House  of 
killed  (October  8,  1831).  lords. 


436  ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

It  was  the  Lords  who  chiefly  profited  by  the  existing  system 
of  nomination  and  rotten  boroughs,  and  they  were  enraged 
at  the  proposal  to  end  it.  They  were  determined  not  to  lose 
the  power  it  gave  them. 

The  defeat  of  the  bill  by  the  Upper  House  caused  great 
indignation  throughout  the  country.  Apparently  the  Lords 
were  simply  greedy  of  their  privileges.  Again  riots^  broke 
out  in  London  and  other  towns,  expressive  of  the  popular 
feeling.  Newspapers  appeared  in  mourning.  Bells  were 
tolled.  Threats  of  personal  violence  to  the  Lords  were  made, 
and  in  certain  instances  carried  out.  Troops  were  called 
out  in  some  places.  England,  it  was  widely  felt,  was  verg- 
ing toward  a  civil  war. 
Third  Parliament  was  now  prorogued.     It  reassembled  December 

.  .  6th,  and  on  the  12th,  Lord  John  Russell  rose  again  and  in- 

troduced his  third  Reform  Bill.  Again  the  same  tiresome 
tactics  of  the  Opposition.  But  the  bill  finally  passed  the 
House  of  Commons,  March  23,  1832,  by  a  majority  of  116. 

Again  the  bill  was  before  the  Lords,  who  showed  the  same 
disposition  to  defeat  it  as  before.  The  situation  seemed 
hopeless.  Twice  the  Commons  had  passed  the  bill  with  the 
manifest  and  express  approval  of  the  people.  Were  they 
to  be  foiled  by  a  chamber  based  on  hereditary  privilege.'* 
Riots,  monster  demonstrations,  acrimonious  and  bitter  de- 
nunciation, showed  once  more  the  temper  of  the  people. 
There  was  only  one  way  in  which  the  measure  could  be 
carried.  The  King  might  create  enough  peers  to  give  its 
supporters  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Lords.  This,  how- 
ever, William  IV  at  first  refused  to  do.  The  Grey  ministry 
consequently  resigned.  The  King  appealed  to  the  Duke 
of  Wellington  to  form  a  ministry.  The  Duke  tried  but 
failed.  The  King  then  gave  way,  recalled  Earl  Grey  to 
power  and  signed  a  paper  stating,  "  The  King  grants  per- 
mission to  Earl  Grey  and  to  his  Chancellor,  Lord  Brougham, 
to  create  such  a  number  of  peers  as  will  be  sufficient  to 
insure  the  passing  of  the  Reform  Bill."     The  peers  were 


PROVISIONS  OF  THE  REFORM  BILL        437 

never   created.     The   threat    sufficed.     The   bill   passed   the  The  Bill 

Lords,  June  4,  1832,  about  100  of  its  opponents  absenting  ^^^^^  ' 

themselves  from  the  House.     It  was  signed  and  became  a 

law. 

The  bill  had  undergone  some  changes  during  its  passage. 

In   its   final   form   it  provided  that   fifty-six  nomination   or 

close  boroughs  with  a  population  of  less  than  2,000  should 

lose   their   representation   entirely;   that   thirty-two    others, 

with  a  population  of  less  than  4,000  should  lose  one  seat 

each.     The   seats   thus   obtained  were   redistributed   as   fol-  Hedistribu- 

lows :  twenty-two  large  towns  were  given  two  members  each ;  J^°^  ° 
•  Till  •      Se&ts. 

twenty  others  were  given  one  each,  and  the  larger  counties 

were  given  additional  members,  sixty-five  in  all.  Scotland 
and  Ireland  were  by  companion  bills  given  increased  repre- 
sentation. One  hundred  and  forty-three  seats  were  thus  re- 
distributed. There  was  no  attempt  to  make  equal  electoral 
districts,  but  only  to  remove  more  flagrant  abuses.  Con- 
stituencies still  varied  greatly  in  population.  The  total 
membership  of  the  House  was  not  altered  but  remained  658. 
The  Reform  Bill  also   altered  and  widened  the  suffrage.  The 

Previously  the  county  franchise  had  depended  entirely  upon  ^°^    ,  . 

*'      ,  ^  ^  \     ^  »»      x-       franchise. 

the  ownership  of  land;  that  is,  was  limited  to  those  who 

owned  outright  land  of  an  annual  value  of  forty  shillings, 

the    forty-shilling    freeholders.     The    county    suffrage    was 

now  extended  to  include  also  copyholders  and  leaseholders, 

i.  e.,  farmers  and  tenants  of  land  whose  tenure  was  for  sixty 

years,  and  of  the  annual  value  of  ten  pounds,  and  to  tenants- 

at-will  holding  land  worth  fifty  pounds  a  year.      Thus  in  the 

counties   the  suffrage  was  dependent  still  upon  the  tenure 

of  land,  but  not  upon  outright  ownership.     There  were,  it  is 

seen,  several  methods  of  acquiring  the  county  franchise. 

In  the  boroughs   a  far  greater  change  was  made.     The  The 

previous   local   franchises   were   all   abolished,   the   personal  „° 

.  ,   .  .  •/•         franchise, 

rights  of  living  voters  being  guaranteed,  and  a  new  uniform 

suffrage  was  adopted.     The  right  to  vote  was  given  to  all 

ten   pound  householders,   which   meant    all   who    owned   or 


democratic 
reform. 


438    ENGLAND  TO  THE  REFORM  BILL  OF  1832 

rented  a  house  or  shop  or  other  building  of  an  annual  rental 
value,  -with  the  land,  of  ten  pounds.  Thus  the  suffrage  was 
practically  given  in  boroughs  to  the  great  middle  class. 
There  was  henceforth  a  uniform  suffrage  in  boroughs,  and  a 
varied  suffrage  in  counties. 

The  law  applied  only  to  England.     In  the  same  session 
similar  reform  bills  were  passed  for  Scotland  and  Ireland. 
In   order   to    reduce   bribery,   voting   in   each   constituency 
was  limited  henceforth  to  two  days. 
^°*  ^  The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  was  not  a*  democratic  measure,  but 

it  made  the  House  of  Commons  a  truly  representative  body. 
It  admitted  to  the  suffrage  the  wealthier  middle  class.  The 
number  of  voters,  particularly  in  the  boroughs,  was  con- 
siderably increased ;  but  the  laborers  of  England  had  no  votes, 
nor  had  the  poorer  middle  class.  The  average  ratio  of  voters 
to  the  whole  population  of  Great  Britain  was  about  one  to 
thirty.  The  measure,  therefore,  though  regarded  as  final 
by  the  Whig  ministry,  was  not  so  regarded  by  the  vast 
majority,  who  were  still  disfranchised.  No  further  alteration 
was  made  until  1867,  but  during  the  whole  period  there  was 
a  demand  for  extension.  In  1831  and  1832  the  people, 
by  their  monster  meetings,  riots,  acts  of  violence,  had  helped 
greatly  to  pass  the  bill  only  to  find  when  the  struggle 
was  over  that  others  and  not  themselves  had  profited  by 
their  efforts. 

The  passage  of  the  Reform  Bill  showed  clearly  the  pre- 
dominance in  the  state  of  the  House  of  Commons  over  both 
King  and  Lords  in  case  the  House  has  the  evident  and  em- 
phatic support  of  the  people. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  GREAT  REFORMS 

(1832-1867) 

England  had  entered  upon  a  period  of  Whig  government  An  Era 

that  was  destined  to  be  almost  as  prolonged  as  the  preceding  °    Whig 

.  ,  .  government, 

period  of  Tory  rule.     The  Tories  had  been  m  power  from 

1784  to  1830,  with  but  one  short  interval.  From  1830  to 
1874)  the  Whigs  controlled  the  government,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  short  periods  which  amounted  in  all  to  eight  years. 
In  the  elections  of  1832,  held  under  the  new  conditions, 
the  Whigs  were  overwhelmingly  victorious.  The  Tories  re- 
turned only  about  150  members.  The  terms  Tory  and  Whig 
now  gradually  gave  way  to  the  terms  Conservative  and 
Liberal,  which  are  still  in  use. 

The  reforming  activity  of  the  Whigs,  which  had  achieved 
the  notable  triumph  of  the  great  change  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  continued  unabated  for  several  years.  Several 
measures  of  great  importance  were  passed  by  the  reformed 
Parliament  during  the  next  few  years. 

One  of  the  first  of  these  was  the  abolition  of  slavery  in 
1833.  It  had  been  long  held  by  the  British  courts  that 
slavery  could  not  exist  in  the  British  Isles,  that  the  instant 
a  slave  touched  the  soil  of  England  he  became  free.  More- 
over, after  a  long  agitation,  England  had  abolished  the 
slave  trade  in  1807.  Henceforth  it  was  a  crime  to  kidnap 
negroes  in  Africa  and  sell  them  into  slavery.  But  slavery  Slavery  in 
itself  existed  in  the  West  Indies,  in  Mauritius  and  in  South  *^®  colonies. 
Africa.  There  were  about  750,000  slaves  in  these  colonies. 
To  free  them  was  a  far  more  difficult  matter  than  to  stop 
the  African  slave  trade,  for  it  was  considered  an  interference 

439 


44-0       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 

with  the  rights^  of  property,  and  it  might  ruin  the 
prosperity  of  the  colonies.  Two  causes  were  now  working 
for  the  abolition  of  slavery,  a  growing  sensitiveness  to  the 
moral  iniquity  of  the  institution  and  the  decreasing  influence 
of  its  leading  supporters,  the  West  Indian  planters,  owing 
to  the  fact  that  their  trade  with  Great  Britain  had  fallen 
off^  greatly  since  1815.  For  many  years  an  anti-slavery 
agitation  had  been  in  progress,  ably  led  by  Wilberforce, 
Buxton,  and  Zachary  Macaulay,  father  of  the  historian, 
who  had  created  the  public  opinion  indispensably  necessary 
to  any  reform. 

Various  acts  of  legislation  had  been  passed  looking  toward 
the  improvement  of  the  position  of  slaves  in  the  crown 
colonies,  but  not  providing  for  the  abolition  of  the  institu- 
tion itself.  These  measures  were  indignantly  and  hotly 
resented  by  the  planters,  who  denounced  the  action  of  the 
English  government  in  vituperative  terms,  unwise  conduct, 
as  it  still  further  alienated  public  opinion  in  the  mother 
Abolition  country.  A  bill  was  passed  in  August  1833  decreeing  that 
of  slavery,  slavery  should  cease  August  1,  1834.  It  provided  for  the 
immediate  emancipation  of  all  children  of  six  years  and 
under ;  for  a  period  of  apprenticeship  for  all  others  for  seven 
years,  during  which  three-fourths  of  their  time  was  to  belong 
to  their  former  masters,  one-fourth  to  themselves.  This, 
is  was  argued,  would  give  them  the  preparation  necessary 
for  a  wise  and  intelligent  use  of  freedom,  but  the  provision 
did  not  work  well  in  practice  and  was  ultimately  allowed 
to  lapse.  A  gift  of  twenty  million  pounds  was  made  to 
the  slave  owners  as  compensation  for  the  loss  of  their 
property. 

Conscience  was  aroused  at  the  same  time  by  a  cruel  evil 

right  at  home,  the  employment,  under  barbarous  conditions, 

of  children  in  the  factories   of  England. 

Child  The  employment  of  child  labor  in  British  industries  was 

labor.  one  of  the  results  of  the  rise  of  the  modern  factory  system. 

It  was  early  seen  that  much  of  the  work  done  by  macliinery 


PROBLEM  OF  CHILD  LABOR  441 

could  be  carried  on  by  children,  and  as  their  labor  was 
cheaper  than  that  of  adults  they  were  swept  into  the 
factories  in  larger  and  larger  numbers,  and  a  monstrous 
evil  grew  up.  They  were,  of  course,  the  children  of  the 
poorest  people.  Many  began  this  life  of  misery  at  the 
age  of  five  or  six,  more  at  the  age  of  eight  or  nine.  In- 
credible as  it  may  seem,  they  were  often  compelled  to  work 
twelve  or  fourteen  hours  a  day.  Half  hour  intervals  were 
allowed  for  meals,  but  by  a  refinement  of  cruelty  they 
were  expected  to  clean  the  machinery  at  such  times.  Fall- 
ing asleep  at  their  work  they  were  beaten  by  overseers 
or  injured  by  falling  against  the  machinery.  In  this  in- 
human regime  there  was  no  time  or  strength  left  for  educa- 
tion or  recreation  or  healthy  development  of  any  kind. 
The  moral  atmosphere  in  wliich  the  children  worked  was 
harmful  in  the  extreme.  Physically,  intellectually,  morally, 
the  result  could  only  be  stunted  human  beings. 

This  shocking  abuse  had  been  attacked  spasmodically  and  Previous 

unsuccessfully  for  thirty  years.     In  1802  a  law  was  passed  ^^^^^.cks 

.  1 .       upon  the 
limiting  the  number  of  hours  to  twelve  a  day,  and  providnig  gygtem. 

that  work  should  not  begin  before  six  in  the  morning,  nor 

continue  after  nine  at  night.     It  applied,  however,  to  but 

few  mills.     In   1816   a  bill  was   introduced   providing  that 

no  child  should  be  employed  for  more  than  ten  hours  a  day 

in    any    factory.     The    House    of    Lords    limited    this    to 

cotton  mills  and  extended  the  hours  to  twelve.     Later  it  was 

voted  that  each  child  should  have  a  quarter  of  a  holiday 

on  each  Saturday.      Such  was  the  pitifully  small  protection 

guaranteed  children  workers  by  the  laws  of  England. 

This  monstrous   system  was   defended  by  political  econ-  ^^^ 

omists,  manufacturers,  and  statesmen  in  the  name  of  indi- 

'  '  ^  Qeienaea. 

vidual  liberty,  in  whose  name,  moreover,  crimes  have  often 
been  committed,  the  liberty  of  the  manufacturer  to  conduct 
his  business  without  interference  from  outside,  the  liberty 
of  the  laborer  to  sell  his  labor  under  whatever  conditions 
he  may  be  disposed  or,  as  might  more  properly  be  said, 


442       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


The 

Factory 
Act,   1833. 


The  decay 
of  local 
self-govern- 
ment. 


compelled  to  accept.  A  Parliament,  however,  which  had 
been  so  sensitive  to  the  wrongs  of  negro  slaves  in  Jamaica, 
could  not  be  indifferent  to  the  fate  of  English  cliildren. 
Thus  the  long  efforts  of  many  English  humanitarians,  Rob- 
ert Owen,  Thomas  Sadler,  Fielden,  Lord  Ashley,  resulted  in 
the  passage  of  the  Factory  Act  of  1833,  which  prohibited 
the  employment  in  spinning  and  weaving  factories  of  children 
under  nine,  made  a  maximum  eight  hour  day  for  those  from 
nine  to  thirteen,  and  of  twelve  for  those  from  thirteen  to 
eighteen.  The  bill  also  provided  for  the  sanitary  conditions 
of  the  factories,  for  a  certain  amount  of  recreation  and 
education,  and,  most  important,  it  created  a  sj^stem  of 
factory  inspectors  whose  duty  it  was  to  see  that  this  law 
was  enforced.  This  was  a  very  modest  beginning,  yet  it 
represented  a  great  advance  on  the  preceding  policy  of 
England.  It  was  the  first  of  a  series  of  acts  regulating 
the  conditions  of  laborers  in  the  interests  of  society  as  a 
whole,  acts  which  have  become  more  numerous,  more  minute, 
and  more  drastic  from  1833  to  the  present  day.  The  idea 
that  an  employer  may  conduct  his  business  entirely  as  he 
likes  has  no  standing  in  modem  English  law. 

The  reform  spirit,  which  rendered  the  decade  from  1830 
to  1840  so  notable,  achieved  another  vast  improvement  in 
the  radical  transformation  of  municipal  government.  The 
local  self-government  of  England  enjoyed  great  fame  abroad 
but  was  actually  in  a  very  sorry  condition  at  home.  Not  only 
was  the  Parliament  of  1830  the  organ  of  an  oligarchy,  but  so 
was  the  system  of  local  government.  Usurpations  of  power 
by  a  single  class  had  gone  on  flourishingl}'^  under  the  Tudor 
and  Stuart  and  even  Hanoverian  kings.  The  whole  political 
structure,  local  as  well  as  general,  was  honeycombed  with 
notorious  abuses.  The  municipal  and  the  parliamentary 
systems  were  closely  bound  together.  The  unreformed 
boroughs  were  natural  supports  of  an  unreformed  House 
of  Commons.  Now  that  Parliament  had  been  reformed 
it  was  natural  that  the  same  party  should  attempt  to  bring 


MUNICIPAL  GOVERNMENT  443 

about   the   abolition   of  the   evils   of  local  government.      In  The 

earlier  centuries  all  the  freemen  of  the  boroua;h  had  eniovetl  ^^^^^^^^ 
<•  „    •    1         /.    •  •         1  •  11,  11  "^       for    reform 

full  rights  of  citizenship,  and  local  government  had  been  popu- 
lar in  character.  But  with  the  lapse  of  time  the  term  "  free- 
men "  had  become  technical  and  applied  only  to  a  few  in  each 
borough,  and  frequently  to  non-residents.  Thus  Cambridge, 
with  a  population  of  about  20,000,  had  only  118  "  free- 
men," Portsmouth,  with  46,000,  only  102.  Many  of  these 
were  poor,  paid  small  taxes,  and  were  in  no  sense  representa- 
tive citizens,  yet  they  alone  possessed  the  right  to  vote  in 
municipal  elections.  Thus,  in  Cambridge,  the  freemen  paid 
only  about  two  thousand  pounds  of  the  twenty-five  thousand 
of  the  city  taxes.  But  in  many  cases  even  the  "  freemen  " 
had  no  political  power,  but  only  privileges  of  a  pecuniary 
nature,  such  as  a  right  to  share  in  certain  charitable 
funds  and  of  exemption  from  tolls.  In  very  numerous  cases 
the  local  government  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  cor- 
poration, that  is,  the  mayor  and  the  common  council.  The 
mayor  was  chosen  by  the  council  and  the  councilors  sat 
for  life  and  had  the  right  to  fill  all  vacancies  in  their  body. 
The  government  in  such  cases  was  literally  a  close  corpora- 
tion. Thus,  throughout  all  England,  a  very  small  minority 
had  an  absolute  monopoly  of  political  power  in  towns  and 
cities. 

These  municipal  governments   were  notoriously   corrupt.  Municipal 

Elected  for  life  and  self-elected  they  had  no   sense  of  re-  &overn- 

•1  •!•  1  •  1  mi    •  T         ments 

sponsibility  to  the  community  at  large,      iheir  proceedings  notoriously 

were  generally  secret.     They  levied  taxes  but  rendered  no  corrupt. 

account  of  how  they  expended  them.     Neglecting  the  needs 

of   the   community    for   proper    policing,    paving,    lighting, 

sanitation,  they  used  the  funds  largely  for  self-gratification 

or  personal  advantage  or  the  advantage  of  the  party  which 

they  favored.     In  many  of  the  smaller  boroughs  the  mayor 

alone    was    practically    the    entire    government.      Generally 

speaking,  those  Englishmen  who  lived  in  boroughs  were  not 

only  not  self -governed,  but  were  wretchedly  misgoverned. 


444<       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 

This   system  received  its   death-blow   from  the  reform   of 

Parliament.     The  two  systems  hung  together,  were  mutually 

interdependent.     The  reform  of  one  had,   as   an  inevitable 

consequence,  the  reform  of  the  other.     The  power  of  the 

privileged  class  in  the  House  of  Commons  had  rested  largely 

upon  the  ease  with  which  they  had  been  able  to  secure  control 

of  these  little  local  oligarchies,  which  had  had  the  right  to 

elect  the  members  of  the  boroughs  to  the  House.     In  1833 

a  commission  was  appointed  to  investigate  the  whole  subject, 

which  it  did  with  convincing  thorouglmess. 

The  reform        j^   1835   a  law  was   passed,  the  Municipal   Corporations 

\  Act,  second  in  importance  only  to  the  Reform  Bill.     This 
government.  .  . 

act    provided    for   the    election    of    town    councilors    by    all 

the  inhabitants  who  had  paid  taxes  during  the  preceding 
three  years.  This  established  a  property  and  residence  quali- 
fication. The  town  council  was  to  elect  the  mayor.  The  town 
council  and  the  constituency  together  formed  the  corpora- 
tion. The  proceedings  of  the  council  were  to  be  public; 
the  accounts  were  to  be  published  and  audited.  Not  only 
were  property  owners  but  property  renters  included  in  the 
new  electorate.  Those  who  rented  property  that  was  on 
the  tax  lists  as  worth  ten  pounds  a  year  had  the  right  to 
vote  as  well  as  those  who  paid  taxes  themselves ;  in  other 
words,  a  man  who  paid  a  rent  of  about  a  dollar  a  week 
for  his  house  or  his  store  was  now  enfranchised.  This  bill 
did  not  apply  to  London,  reserved  for  special  treatment,  nor 
to  sixty-seven  boroughs,  which  were  very  small,  but  con- 
cerned 178  boroughs,  the  large  majority.  It  is  estimated 
that  about  two  million  people  were  affected  by  it.  The  bill 
was  not  a  democratic  measure,  but  it  gave  borough  govern- 
ment, as  the  bill  of  1832  had  given  parliamentary,  to  the 
wealthy  and  the  middle  classes.  It  effectually  restored 
self-government.  The  basis  of  representation  has  been 
widened  since  1835.  A  similar  act  for  Scotland,  sweep- 
ing away  abuses  even  more  glaring,  had  been  passed  in 
1833. 


ACCESSION  OF  QUEEN  VICTORIA  445 

In  the  midst  of  this  period  of  reform  occurred  a  change  Accession 
in  the  occupancy  of  the  throne.  King  William  IV  died  June  ^^  ftueen 
20,  1837,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  niece,  Victoria.  The 
young  Queen  was  the  daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Kent,  fourth 
son  of  George  III.  She  was,  at  the  time  of  her  accession, 
eighteen  years  of  age.  She  had  been  carefully  educated, 
but  owing  to  the  fact  that  William  IV  disliked  her  mother, 
she  had  seen  very  little  of  court  life,  and  was  very  little 
known.  Carlyle,  oppressed  with  all  the  weary  weight  of 
this  unintelligible  world,  pitied  her,  quite  unnecessarily. 
"  Poor  little  Queen !  "  said  he,  "  she  is  at  an  age  at  which 
a  girl  can  hardly  be  trusted  to  choose  a  bonnet  for  herself; 
yet  a  task  is  laid  upon  her  from  which  an  archangel  might 
shrink."  Not  such  was  the  mood  of  the  Queen.  She  was 
buoyant  and  joyous,  and  entered  with  zest  upon  a  reign  which 
was  to  prove  the  longest  in  the  annals  of  England.  She 
impressed  all  who  saw  her  with  her  dignity  and  poise.     Her  Her 

political  education  was  conducted  under  the  guidance,  first  ^^  ^  ^^* 
^  .  °  education^ 

of  Leopold,  King  of  Belgium,  her  uncle,  and  after  her  acces- 
sion, of  Lord  Melbourne,  both  of  whom  instilled  in  her  mind 
the  principles  of  constitutional  monarchy.  The  question  of 
her  marriage  was  important  and  was  decided  by  herself.  Sum- 
moning her  cousin.  Prince  Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg,  into  her 
presence,  she  offered  him  her  hand — "  a  nervous  thing  to  do," 
as  she  afterward  said,  yet  the  only  thing  as  "  he  would  never 
have  presumed  to  take  such  a  liberty  "  himself  as  to  ask  for 
the  hand  of  the  Queen  of  England.  The  marriage,  cele- 
brated in  1840,  was  a  marriage  of  affection.  "  She  is  as  full 
of  love  as  Juliet,"  said  Sir  Robert  Peel.  Her  married  life  was 
exceptionally  happy,  and  when  the  Prince  Consort  died 
twenty-one  years  later,  she  was  inconsolable.  During  these 
years  he  was  her  constant  adviser,  and  so  complete  was  the 
harmony  of  their  views  that  he  was  practically  quite  as  much 
the  ruler  of  the  country  as  was  she. 

The  early  years  of  the  new  reign  were  years  of  trouble 
and  unrest.     The  accession  of  Victoria  brought  to  an  end 


446       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


Hanover. 


The 

Badicals 
and  the 
Reform 
Bill. 


the  connection  between  England  and  Hanover,  which  had 
existed  since  the  elector  of  Hanover  had  become  king  of 
Great  Britain  in  1714,  under  the  name  of  George  I.  As  the 
Salic  law  obtained  in  Hanover  that  kingdom  now  passed 
to  the  uncle  of  the  Queen,  the  Duke  of  Cumberland,  Ernest 
Augustus.  This  was,  on  the  whole,  more  a  gain  for 
England  than  a  loss,  as  it  freed  her  from  vexatious  en- 
tanglements on  the  Continent.  Far  more  serious  was  the 
disruption  of  the  colonial  empire,  threatened  by  the  Canadian 
Rebellion  of  1837.  This  will  be  described  elsewhere.  More 
serious  still  was  the  widespread  unrest  and  discontent  in 
England  itself,  an  unrest  that  found  expression  in  the 
Chartist  Movement. 

The  Reform  Bill  of  1832  had  been  carried  by  a  combina- 
tion of  Liberals  and  Radicals,  the  latter  furnishing  in  those 
exciting  days  the  appearance  and  the  reality  of  physical 
force,  the  monster  meetings,  the  riots,  which  had  made  the 
Tories  feel  that  a  civil  war  would  result  if  they  did  not 
yield  to  what  was  manifestly  the  people's  will.  A  breach 
between  these  two  elements  now  ensued.  The  Radicals 
looked  upon  the  measure,  to  the  passing  of  which  they  had 
so  greatly  contributed,  as  merely  a  step  in  the  right  direction, 
from  which  they  themselves  had  gained  nothing.  They  were 
a  genuinely  democratic  party,  aiming  at  the  introduction 
into  England  of  tryly  democratic  government,  popular  con- 
trol of  the  House  of  Commons  and  legislation  in  the  interest 
of  the  people,  that  is,  the  great  mass  of  the  workers  of  Great 
Britain.  But  when,  after  1832,  they  attempted  to  bring 
forward  measures  for  a  wider  suffrage  as  a  necessary  pre- 
liminary to  all  this,  they  met  with  uncompromising  opposi- 
tion on  the  part  of  their  former  allies.  Lord  John  Russell 
took  occasion  to  say  publicly  in  1837  that  the  Reform  Act  of 
1832  had  been  made  as  extensive  as  possible  in  the  hope 
that  it  might  be  final ;  and  that  the  question  of  the  franchise 
ought  not  to  be  reopened.  The  leader  of  the  Liberals  had 
spoken.     It  was  clear  that  the  Conservatives  would  be  of 


THE  CHARTISTS  447 

the  same  mind  on  this  matter.     There  had  been  a  reform 
in  1832  in  the  interest  of  the  middle  classes.     Clearly  there 
was   to  be  no  reform  in  the  interest   of  the  lower   classes. 
The  middle  classes  had  said  so.     The  Radicals  felt  that  a 
middle  class  Parliament  would  consider  simply  the  interests 
of  the  middle  class,  and  they  desired  a  democratic  Parlia- 
ment to  legislate  for  the  masses  of  the  laborers  of  England, 
whether  in  town  or  country,  for  the  laborers  were  the  nation. 
The  breach  between  the  former  allies  became  complete.     The  The 
Radicals  dubbed  Lord  John,  "  Finality  Jack."     They  began  Radicals 
a   vehement    agitation    for    further    reform.     Workingmen's  f^j-t^gj. 
associations,   socialist    societies,    the   discontented   generally  reform, 
worked  together. 

In  a  pamphlet  entitled  The  Rotten  House  of  Commons 
(December  1836),  Lovett,  one  of  their  leaders,  proved  from 
official  returns  that,  out  of  6,023,752  adult  males  living 
in  the  United  Kingdom,  only  839,519  were  voters.  He  also 
showed  that  despite  the  reform  of  1832  there  were  great 
inequalities  among  the  constituencies,  that  twenty  members 
were  chosen  by  2,411  votes,  twenty  more  by  86,072.  The 
immediate  demands  of  the  Radicals  were  expressed  in  "  The  The 
People's  Charter,"  or  programme,  a  petition  to  Parliament  I'eople's 
drawn  up  in  1838.  They  demanded  that  the  right  to  vote 
be  given  to  every  adult  man,  declaring,  "  we  perform  the 
duties  of  freemen,  we  must  have  the  privileges  of  freemen  " ; 
that  voting  be  secret,  by  ballot  rather  than  orally  as  was  then 
the  custom,  so  that  every  voter  could  be  free  from  intimida- 
tion, and  less  exposed  to  bribery;  that  property  qualifica- 
tions for  membership  in  the  House  be  abolished ;  and  that  the 
members  receive  salaries  so  that  poor  men,  laborers  them- 
selves and  understanding  the  needs  of  laborers,  might  be 
elected  to  Parliament  if  the  voters  wished.  They  also  de- 
manded that  the  House  of  Commons  should  be  elected,  not 
for  seven  years,  as  was  then  the  law,  but  simply  for  one 
year.  The  object  of  this  was  to  prevent  their  representa- 
tives   misrepresenting   them   by   proving    faithless   to   their 


44.8      ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


Character 
of   the 
Chartist 
agitation. 


The  lack 
of  able 
leadership. 


pledges  or  indifferent  or  hostile  to  the  wishes  of  the  voters. 
Annual  elections  would  give  the  voters  the  chance  to  punish 
such  representatives  speedily  by  electing  others  in  their 
place.  "  The  connection  between  the  representatives  and 
the  people,  to  be  beneficial,  must  be  intimate,"  said  the 
petition.  Such  were  the  five  points  of  the  famous  Charter 
designed  to  make  Parliament  representative  of  the  people,  not 
of  a  class.  Once  adopted,  it  was  felt  that  the  masses  would 
secure  control  of  the  legislature  and  could  then  improve 
their  conditions. 

The  Chartists  had  almost  no  influence  in  Parliament,  and 
their  agitation  had  consequently  to  be  carried  on  outside 
in  workingmcn's  associations,  in  the  cheap  press,  in  popular 
songs  and  poems,  in  monster  meetings  addressed  by  im- 
passioned orators,  in  numerous  and  unprecedentedly  large 
petitions.  One  of  these  was  presented  in  1839.  It  was  in 
the  form  of  a  large  cylinder  of  parchment  about  four  feet 
in  diameter,  and  was  said  to  have  been  signed  by  1,286,000 
persons.  The  petition  was  summarily  rejected.  Notwith- 
standing this  failure  another  was  presented  in  1842,  signed, 
it  was  asserted,  by  over  three  million  persons.  Borne 
through  the  streets  of  London  in  a  great  procession  it  was 
found  too  large  to  be  carried  through  the  door  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  It  was  therefore  cut  up  into  several  parts  and 
deposited  on  the  floor.     This,  too,  was  rejected. 

The  Chartist  movement  lasted  about  ten  years,  from  1838 
to  1848.  It  had  periods  of  quiet,  followed  by  periods  of 
great  activity.  The  latter  were  generally  contemporary 
with  hard  times.  The  whole  movement  was  born  of  the 
great  distress  and  misery  of  the  English  working  class. 
Unfortunately  it  lacked  able  leadership.  Many  of  its  sup- 
porters were  men  of  ability,  devotion,  and  disinterested- 
ness, but  during  most  of  the  time  the  real  leader  was 
Feargus  O'Connor,  an  able  orator,  but  a  weak,  vain, 
unstable  man,  who  knew  better  how  to  alienate  those  who 
naturally    wished    to    co-operate    than    to    consolidate    and 


THE  FAILURE  OF  THE  CHARTISTS         449 

magnify  a  party.  The  Chartists  themselves  divided  into 
two  groups :  those  who  wished  to  use  only  peaceful  methods 
in  their  agitation,  and  those  who  wished  to  make  an  ultimate 
appeal  to  physical  force,  believing  the  other  method  en- 
tirely ineffective.  Whenever  the  physical-force  Chartists 
attempted  to  act  according  to  their  principle  they  were 
severely  punished. 

The  Chartists  could  look  to  neither  great  party  for  aid.  The 
The  movement  smoldered  on  for  ten  years,  blazing  up  P«t"^°^  °^ 
threateningly  in  times  of  unusual  distress.  Indeed,  it  was 
a  kind  of  barometer,  measuring  the  misery  of  the  people  and 
their  sense  of  injustice.  After  1848  the  movement  sub- 
sided. Encouraged  by  the  French  Revolution  of  that  year 
the  Chartists  held  a  great  national  convention  or  people's 
parliament  in  London,  and  planned  a  vast  demonstration 
on  behalf  of  the  Charter.  Half  a  million  men  were  to  accom- 
pany a  new  petition  to  Parliament,  which  it  was  expected 
would  be  overawed  and  would  then  yield  to  so  imposing  a 
demand  of  an  insistent  people.  The  Government  was  so 
alarmed  that  it  entrusted  the  safety  of  London  to  the  Duke 
of  Wellington,  then  seventy-nine  years  of  age.  His  arrange- 
ments were  made  with  his  accustomed  thoroughness.  One 
hundred  and  seventy  thousand  special  constables  were  en- 
rolled, one  of  whom  was  Louis  Napoleon,  who  before  the 
year  was  out  was  to  be  President  of  the  French  Republic. 
The  result  was  that  the  street  demonstration  was  a  failure, 
and  the  petition,  examined  by  a  committee  of  the  House, 
was  found  to  contain,  not  5,706,000  signatures,  as  asserted, 
but  less  than  two  million.  It  was  summarily  rejected.  The 
movement  died  out  owing  to  ridicule,  internal  quarrels, 
but  particularly  because  of  the  growing  prosperity  of  the 
country,  which  resulted  from  the  abolition  of  the  Com 
Laws  and  the  adoption  of  Free  Trade. 

It  is  difficult  to  appraise  the  value  and  significance  of  this  '^^^ 
movement.     Judged  superficially  and  by  immediate  results  the  ^^  ^^^ 
Chartists  failed  completely.     Yet  most  of  the  changes  they  movement. 


450       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


England's 
policy  of 
Protection. 


The  Corn 
Laws. 


advocated  have  since  been  brought  about.  There  are 
now  no  property  qualifications  for  members  of  the  House 
of  Connnons,  and  the  secret  ballot  has  been  secured;  the 
suffrage  is  enjoyed  by  the  immense  majority  of  men,  though 
not  by  all;  the  payment  of  members  has  in  principle  been 
approved  by  the  House  of  Commons  (1906),  though  not 
yet  put  in  force.  Parliaments  are  still  elected  for  seven 
years.  It  seems  that  some  of  the  tremendous  impetus  of 
England  toward  democracy,  which  grew  so  marked  toward 
the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century,  was  derived  from  this 
movement  of  which  Carlyle  wrote  in  1839:  "The  matter  of 
Chartism  is  weighty,  deep-rooted,  far-extending;  did  not 
begin  yesterday;  will  by  no  means  end  this  day  or  to- 
morrow." 

Simultaneously  with  the  Chartist  Movement  another  was 
going  on  which  had  a  happier  issue.  The  adoption  of  the 
principle  of  free  trade  must  always  remain  a  great  event 
in  English  history,  and  was  the  culmination  of  a  remarkable 
movement  that  extended  over  forty  years,  though  its  most 
decisive  phase  was  concentrated  into  a  few  years  of  intense 
activity.  The  change  was  complete  from  a  policy  which 
England  in  common  with  the  rest  of  the  world  had  followed 
for  centuries. 

In  1815  England  believed  thoroughly  in  protection. 
Hundreds  of  articles  were  subject  to  duties  as  they  entered  the 
country,  manufactured  articles,  ra^  materials.  English 
shipping  was  also  protected  by  the  Navigation  Laws.  The 
most  important  single  interest  among  all  those  protected 
was  agriculture.  Parliament  in  1815  was  a  parliament  of 
landlords,  and  their  legislation  was  naturally  favorable  to 
their  interest.  Corn  is  a  word  used  in  England  to  describe 
wheat  and  bread  stuffs  generally.  The  laws  imposing  duties 
on  com  were  the  keystone  of  the  whole  system  of  protection, 
because  they  affected  the  most  influential  class  in  the  nation 
and  the  one,  moreover,  which  made  the  laws.  The  advocates 
of  free  trade  necessarily  therefore  delivered  their  fiei'cest 


ECONOMIC  REFORMS  451 

assaults  upon  the  Corn  Laws.  If  these  could  be  overthrown 
it  was  believed  that  the  whole  system  would  fall.  Not  until 
they  were  abolished  would  England  be  a  free  trade  country. 
The  Corn  Law  of  1815  forbade  the  importation  of  foreign 
corn  until  the  price  should  have  reached  ten  shillings  a  bushel. 
Later,  in  1828,  in  place  of  the  fixed  duty,  was  put  the  so- 
called  sliding  scale,  the  duty  on  foreign  grain  going  up  as 
the  price  of  domestic  grain  fell,  and  decreasing  as  the  home 
price  rose.  But  the  object  was  the  same,  high  protection 
of  British  grain  growers.  This  was  the  particular  feature 
which  the  reformers  attacked.  But  for  a  long  while  the  land- 
lord class  was  so  entrenched  in  political  power  that  the  law 
remained  impregnable.  Small  and  piecemeal  attacks  were 
therefore  made  upon  other  parts  of  the  system.  Huskisson  Huskisson's 
in  1823-5  succeeded  in  carrying  through  a  modification  of  J^c^oi^^is. 
the  Navigation  Laws  of  1651.  Previously  all  commerce 
between  England  and  her  colonies  had  to  be  carried  on  in 
English  ships ;  and  all  commerce  between  England  and  any 
other  country  had  to  be  carried  on  by  English  ships  or  by 
those  of  the  country  concerned.  An  act  was  passed  in  1823 
empowering  the  Government  to  conclude  reciprocity  treaties 
with  foreign  countries,  admitting  their  ships  to  British  ports 
on  the  same  conditions  as  British  ships,  if  they  would  put 
British  shipping  on  the  same  footing  of  equality  with  their 
own  in  their  ports.  This  opened  the  way  for  the  ultimate 
abolition  of  all  restraints  upon  navigation.  Huskisson  also 
succeeded  in  securing  legislation  reducing  duties  on  almost 
all  foreign  manufactures  and  on  many  raw  materials.  These 
changes  were  a  beginning  in  the  direction  of  freer  trade,  but 
they  did  not  touch  the  strongest  interest,  the  landowners, 
protected  by  the  Corn  LaAvs. 

For  the  next  few  years  public  interest  was  absorbed  in  Sir  Robert 
the  various  reforms  already  described.     In  1841  the  Whig    ^.^  .^ 
party,  then  under  the  leadership   of  Lord  Melbourne,   the 
successor  to   Earl  Grey,  was   overthrown,  and   Sir  Robert 
Peel,  leader  of  the  Conservatives,  became  prime   minister. 


452      ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


The  Anti- 
Corn-Law 
League. 


The 

arguments 
for  Free 
Trade. 


His  ministry  lasted  from  1841  to  1846.  The  financial  con- 
dition of  the  state  was  bad,  and  the  distress  of  the  laboring 
classes  general  and  acute.  To  provide  a  surplus  in  place 
of  a  deficit,  and  to  relieve  trade  Peel  carried  through  an 
extensive  tariff^  reform.  In  1842  there  were  about  1,200 
articles  subject  to  tariff  duties.  Peel  succeeded  in  abolish- 
ing or  reducing  the  rates  on  about  750  of  them.  But  the 
most  important  interest  still  remained  essentially  unaffected. 
The  great  struggle  for  free  trade  came  over  the  Com  Laws. 

In  1839  there  was  founded,  in  Manchester,  a  great  manu- 
facturing center,  the  Anti-Com-Law  League.  Its  leader 
was  Richard  Cobden,  a  young  business  man,  successful,  trav- 
eled, thoughtful.  Cobden  was  convinced  that  the  Corn 
Laws  interfered  with  the  growth  of  British  manufactures. 
He  was  soon  joined  by  John  Bright,  like  himself  a  manu- 
facturer, unlike  him,  one  of  the  great  popular  orators  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  The  League,  under  these  two  leaders, 
and  Villiers,  a  member  of  Parliament,  began  an  earnest 
agitation.  It  attempted  to  convince  Englishmen  that  they 
should  completely  reverse  their  commercial  policy  in  the 
interest  of  their  own  prosperity.  The  methods  of  the  League 
were  business-like  and  thorough.  Its  campaign  was  one 
of  persuasion.  It  distributed  a  vast  number  of  pamphlets, 
setting  forth  the  leading  arguments.  Lecturers  were  sent 
to  the  large  cities  and  to  small  country  towns.  In  a  single 
year  four  hundred  lectures  were  delivered  to  800,000  persons. 
A  purely  voluntary  movement,  gifts  poured  in  until  in  1845 
the  League  was  spending  a  million  and  a  quarter  dollars. 
Year  after  year  this  process  of  argumentation  went  on. 

This  free  trade  party  consisted  of  manufacturers  and 
merchants.  The  manufacturers  felt  that  they  did  not  need 
protection  against  foreigners,  as  they  believed  that  their 
own  processes  were  so  far  superior  that  the  latter  could 
not  compete  with  them.  The  home  market  would  re- 
main theirs  even  if  French  and  German  manufacturers 
were  at  entire  liberty  to  send  their  commodities  into  England 


THE  CAMPAIGN  FOR  FREE  TRADE         453 

duty  free.  They  also  believed  that  it  was  absolutely  essen- 
tial for  them  to  gain  foreign  markets,  and  that  this  could  not 
be  done  under  the  existing  system.  Increase  your  foreign 
markets,  they  said,  and  you  increase  the  employment  of 
Englishmen  in  English  factories,  a  thing  of  utmost  im- 
portance as  the  population  is  growing  rapidly.  You  will 
only  be  permitted  to  export  freely  to  other  countries  if  you 
consent  to  take  freely  in  payment  the  commodities  of  those 
countries,  their  grain,  their  timber.  If  you  will  take  these, 
they  will  purchase  your  woolens,  your  cottons,  your  hard- 
ware, and  will  not  attempt  to  manufacture  these  themselves. 
If  you  do  not,  you  will  foster  the  growth  of  foreign  com- 
petitors in  manufacturing  and  will  make  them  rivals  in  the 
markets  of  Europe,  a  suicidal  policy.  "  In  France,"  said 
one  orator,  "  there  are  millions  willing  to  clothe  themselves 
in  English  garments,  and  you  have  millions  of  hungry  mouths 
to  take  their  corn.  In  Hungary,  not  being  able  to  sell 
their  corn  to  England,  the  people  are  turning  their  capital 
to  manufacturing  their  own  cloth."  Replying  to  the  argu- 
ment that  the  removal  of  the  Corn  Laws  would  mean  the 
ruin  of  English  agriculture,  which  it  was  necessary  to  en- 
courage in  order  that  the  country  might  produce  an  adequate 
food  supply  for  its  own  needs,  and  not  become  dependent  on 
other  countries  for  the  very  necessaries  of  life,  they  pointed 
to  Holland,  declaring  that  it  was  "  dependent  upon  every 
country,  that  there  were  no  corn  laws,  yet  no  scarcity  of 
food,  that  wages  were  high  and  trade  brisk."  One  of  the 
most  effective  arguments  was  that  the  time  had  come  when 
the  increasing  population  needed  cheap  food. 

This  agitation  extended  over  seven  years.  It  was  con-  The  Irish 
ducted  quite  independently  of  political  parties.  It  does  famine, 
not  seem,  however,  that  the  repeal  of  the  Com  Laws  could 
have  been  carried  had  it  not  been  for  a  great  natural 
calamity,  the  Irish  famine  of  1845.  "  Famine  itself,  against 
which  we  had  warred,  joined  us,"  said  John  Bright.  The 
food    of   the    vast   majority   of   the   Irish   people   was    the 


454.       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


Repeal  of 
the  Corn 
Laws. 


potato.  More  than  half  of  the  eight  million  inhabitants 
of  Ireland  depended  on  it  alone  for  sustenance,  and  with 
a  large  part  of  the  rest  it  was  the  chief  article  of  diet.  A 
failure  in  the  potato  crop  could  mean  nothing  less  than 
famine.  In  the  fall  of  1845  this  was  precisely  what  impended, 
for  a  potato  disease  had  set  in  and  it  was  evident  that 
the  crop  would  be  hopelessly  ruined.  Potatoes  could  not 
be  obtained  from  foreign  countries  which,  fearing  for  them- 
selves, were  forbidding  their  exportation.  At  the  same  time 
the  English  grain  crops  were  very  poor,  and  foreign  grain 
could  not  be  bought  by  these  Irish  peasants,  so  high  was 
the  duty.  The  alternatives  seemed  unavoidable,  either  star- 
vation for  multitudes  or  cheap  grain,  which  could  be  ob- 
tained only  by  the  repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws.  The  famine 
came,  and  tens  of  thousands  perished  of  starvation.  Great 
charitable  gifts  from  England  and  America  aimed  to  relieve 
the  distress  but  proved  inadequate.  Finally,  in  1846,  Sir 
Robert  Peel  carried  against  bitter  opposition  the  repeal  of 
the  Corn  Laws  by  a  combination  of  Conservative  and  Liberal 
votes. ^  But  in  so  doing  he  split  his  party.  The  bill  was 
passed  by  223  Liberals  and  104  Conservatives,  against  229 
Conservatives.  Peel  had  come  into  office  in  1841  the  head 
of  a  party  pledged  to  the  support  of  the  Com  Laws ;  in 
1846  he  repealed  them  against  the  passionate  opposition  of 
two-thirds  of  his  own  pal•t3^  The  vengeance  of  the  pro- 
tectionists was  not  long  in  coming.  Peel  was  shortly  over- 
thrown b}^  their  votes,  after  having  revolutionized  the  com- 
mercial policy  of  Great  Britain.  Peel  had  been  converted 
to  the  theory  of  free  trade  some  time  before  the  Irish  crisis. 
That  crisis  simply  gave  an  irresistible  practical  reason  for 
putting  the  theory  into  immediate  effect. 

There  still  remained  after  this  many  duties  for  pro- 
tective purposes  in  the  English  tariff,  but  the  keystone  of 
the  whole  system  was  removed.      In  1849  the  Navigation 

*  Until  1849  there  was  still  to  be  a  duty,  but  a  slight  one,  on  corn. 
Then  a  nominal  one  of  a  shilling  a  quarter.     This  was  abolished  in  1869. 


ABOLITION  OF  PROTECTIVE  DUTIES       455 

Laws  were  finally  abolished,  and  the  ships  of  all  the  world  Remaining 

miffht   compete   with  English   ships   for  the   carrying  trade  Protective 

.  .  .  .  duties 

to  England  and  her  colonies,  might  enter  British  harbors  „j.aduallv 

as  freely  as  British  ships  might.  In  1853  Mr.  Gladstone  removed, 
succeeded  in  having  the  duties  removed  from  123  articles, 
and  reduced  on  133  others.  In  1860  the  number  of  com- 
modities subject  to  the  tariff  was  reduced  to  48.  In  1866 
the  duty  on  lumber  was  abolished.  England  now  has  a 
tariff,  but  it  is  for  revenue  only,  not  for  the  protection 
of  English  industries.  Nearly  all  of  the  revenue  from  the 
tariff,  which  now  amounts  to  over  a  hundred  and  sixty 
million  dollars,  comes  from  the  duties  on  tobacco,  tea,  spirits, 
wine,  and  sugar.  England  is  absolutely  dependent  upon 
other  countries  for  her  food  supplies.  It  was  evident  as 
early  as  1845  that  English  agriculture  could  not  support 
England's  population. 

The  twenty  years  succeeding  the  repeal  of  the  Corn  labor 
Laws  were  years  of  quiescence  and  transition.  Compar-  legislation., 
atively  few  changes  of  importance  were  made  in  legisla- 
tion. Those  of  greatest  significance  concerned  the  regula- 
tion of  employment  in  factories  and  mines.  Such  legisla- 
tion, merciful  in  its  immediate  effects  and  momentous  in 
the  reach  of  the  principles  on  which  it  rested,  was  enacted 
particularly  during  the  decade  from  1840  to  1850.  The 
initial  step  in  such  legislation  had  been  taken  in  the  Factory 
Act  of  1833,  already  described,  a  law  that  regulated  some- 
what the  conditions  under  which  children  and  women  could 
be  employed  in  the  textile  industries.  But  labor  was  un- 
protected in  many  other  industries,  in  which  gross  abuses 
prevailed.  One  of  the  most  famous  parliamentary  reports 
of  the  nineteenth  century  was  that  of  a  commission  ap- 
pointed to  investigate  the  conditions   in  mines.      Published  Regulation 

in  1842,  its  amazing  revelations  revolted  public  opinion  and  '* 

.  .      in  mines, 

led  to  quick  action.      It  showed  that  children  of  five,  six, 

seven   years    of   age   were   employed   underground   in   coal 

mines,  girls  as  well  as  boys;  that  women  as  well  as  men 


456      ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


Pactory 
laws. 


Morley  on 
the  labor 
code. 


labored  under  conditions  fatal  to  health  and  morals ;  that 
the  hours  were  long,  twelve  or  fourteen  a  day,  and  the 
dangers  great.  They  were  veritable  beasts  of  burden,  drag- 
ging and  pushing  carts  on  hands  and  knees  along  narrow 
and  low  passageways,  in  which  it  was  impossible  to  stand 
erect.  Girls  of  eight  or  ten  carried  heavy  buckets  of  coal 
on  their  backs  up  steep  ladders  many  times  a  day.  The 
revelations  were  so  astounding  and  sickening  that  a  law 
was  passed  in  1842  which  forbade  the  employment  of  women 
and  girls  in  mines ;  and  which  permitted  the  employment  of 
boys  of  ten  for  only  three  days  a  week. 

Once  embarked  on  this  policy  of  protecting  the  econom- 
icall}^  dependent  classes.  Parliament  was  forced  to  go  further 
and  further  in  the  governmental  regulation  of  private  in- 
dustry. In  1844  a  law  was  passed  which  restricted  the 
labor  of  children  in  factories  to  half  of  each  day,  or  six 
and  a  half  hours,  or  the  whole  of  every  other  day,  the  labor 
of  women  to  twelve  hours,  and  also  restricting  night  work 
still  further.  The  Factory  Act  of  1847,  altered  somewhat 
by  an  act  of  1850,  practically  established  a  ten-hour  day 
for  labor,  a  demand  long  urged  by  the  laboring  class  and 
bitterly  opposed  by  manufacturers  as  ruinous  to  industry, 
as  certain  to  lower  wages,  and  to  drive  capital  to  foreign 
countries,  by  economists  as  in  violation  of  the  "  laws  "  of 
political  economy,  by  both  as  a  violation  of  the  right  of 
free  contract. 

Since  then  a  long  series  of  similar  statutes  has  been  enacted 
by  the  English  Parhament,  which  it  is  here  impossible  to 
describe,  so  extensive  and  minute,  that  Morley,  writing  nearly 
thirty  years  ago,  and  speaking  of  the  Factory  and  Work- 
shop Consolidation  Act  of  1878,  an  act  of  more  than 
fifty  printed  pages,  virtually  a  labor  code,  could  say :  "  We 
have  to-day  a  complete,  minute,  and  voluminous  code  for 
the  protection  of  labor;  buildings  must  be  kept  pure  of 
effluvia ;  dangerous  machinery  must  be  fenced ;  children  and 
young  persons  must  not  clean  it  while  in  motion ;  their  hours 


LABOR  LEGISLATION  457 

are  not  only  limited,  but  fixed;  continuous  employment 
nmst  not  exceed  a  given  number  of  hours,  varying  with  the 
trade,  but  prescribed  by  the  law  in  given  cases ;  a  statutable 
number  of  holidays  is  imposed;  the  children  must  go  to 
school,  and  the  employer  must  every  week  have  a  certificate 
to  that  effect ;  if  an  accident  happens,  notice  must  be  sent 
to  tlie  proper  authorities ;  special  provisions  are  made  for 
bake-houses,  for  lace-making,  for  collieries,  and  for  a  whole 
schedule  of  other  special  callings ;  for  the  due  enforcement 
and  vigilant  supervision  of  this  immense  host  of  minute 
prescriptions,  there  is  an  immense  host  of  inspectors,  cer- 
tifying surgeons,  and  other  authorities,  whose  business  it 
is  '  to  speed  and  post  o'er  land  and  ocean '  in  restless 
guardianship  of  every  kind  of  labor,  from  that  of  the  woman 
who  plaits  straw  at  her  cottage  door,  to  the  miner  who 
descends  into  the  bowels  of  the  earth,  and  the  seaman  who 
conveys  the  fruits  and  materials  of  universal  industry  to  and 
fro  between  the  remotest  parts  of  the  globe."  ^ 

Since  1878  the  principle  of  governmental  regulation  has 
been  much  more  extensively  applied.  The  labor  code  of 
to-day  is  contained  in  the  Factory  and  Workshop  Act  of 
1901,  called  by  Dicey  "  the  most  notable  achievement  of 
English  socialism."  - 

This  mid-century  period  of  English  history,  so  sterile  <5rowth  of 
in  political  interest,  is  thus  seen  to  be  highly  significant  in 
the  economic  sphere.  It  was  the  period  in  which  trade- 
unionism  grew  rapidly,  solidified  itself,  perfected  its  ma- 
chinery, and  discussed  and  clarified  the  demands  of  the 
laboring  class.  The  effect  of  this  preliminary  work  was 
apparent  later.  Workingmen  were  receiving  in  their  unions 
a  kind  of  education  in  politics   and  management  that  was 

»  Morley,  Life  of  Cobden,  Ch.  XIII. 

°  The  Combination  Act  of  1800  which,  in  connection  with  the  law  of 
conspiracy  then  in  force,  made  a  trade  union  an  unlawful  association, 
was  repealed  in  1824.  Since  then  such  organizations  have  not  been  ille- 
gal. They  have  grown  greatly  and  now  enjoy  strong  legal  protection. 
See  Dicey,  Law  and  Opinion  in  England,  95-102;  190-200;  266-272. 


458       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 

a  valuable  training  for  the  use  of  the  suffrage,  when  they 
should  get  it,  as  they  did  in  1867.  ]\Ieanwhile  they  came 
to  attach  less  importance  to  purely  political  privileges,  such 
as  those  demanded  by  the  Charter,  and  to  study  far  more 
carefully  social  questions,  arising  from  the  relations  of  capital 
and  labor.  During  these  years  a  remarkable  change  of  opin- 
The  growth  ion  was  going  on.  The  beauties  of  individualism  were  seen 
of  collectiv-  to  be  less  attractive ;  the  advantages  of  collectivism  or  social- 
ism were  more  and  more  emphasized.  The  economic  and 
social  beliefs  of  large  classes  of  the  population  were  under- 
going a  profound  transformation.  The  revolution  of  thought 
was  one  tending  distinctly  toward  socialism.'  This  trans- 
formation was  proceeding  quietly,  and  its  significance  did 
not  become  apparent  until  after  the  passage  of  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1867. 

This  period  of  comparative  inaction  in  England  was   a 

time  of  great  and  stirring  events  and  changes  abroad,  the 

period  of  the  revolutions  of  1848,  of  the  Crimean  War,  in 

which  England   played   a   leading   part,   of   the   making   of 

Italy,  the  rise  of  Prussia,  the  dismemberment  of  Denmark, 

the  humiliation   of  Austria,   the   Civil  War   in  the   United 

States.      The  foreign  policy  of  the  ministry  was  active,  the 

domestic  very  subordinate. 

Jews  ad-  Yet  during  these  years  certain  internal  reforms  were  car- 

mitted  to      j,-^^  through,  which  are  worthy  of  mention.      In  1858  under 

the   House        i-i^i-i-vt-.  t  •        -, 

of  Commons.  ^^^    Derby-Disraeli    mmistry    Jews    were    permitted    to    sit 

in  the  House  of  Commons ;  the  oath  required  of  members 
containing  the  words  "  on  the  time  faith  of  a  Christian," 
was  altered,  and  thus  another  piece  of  religious  intolerance 
was  removed,  another  step  in  the  secularization  of  the  state 
taken,  and  a  controversy  of  twenty-five  years  terminated. 
Another  reform  of  the  same  session  was  the  abolition  of 
the  property  qualification  for  members  of  Parliament.     Thus 

*  On  this  subject  see  the  remarkable  Chapter  VII,  in  Dicey,  Law  and 
Opinion  in  England,  entitled,  "  The  Growth  of  Collectivism."  On  Trade 
Unionism  see  Bright,  History  of  England,  IV,  401-406. 


POSTAL  SAVINGS  BANKS  459 

one  point  of  the  Charter  was  registered  quietly.      The  gov- 
ernment of  India  also  was  greatly  altered. 

During    many    of     these    years     Gladstone    was     Chan-  Gladstone, 
cellor  of  the   Exchequer    (1852-1855;   1859-1866),   and   in  Chancellor 
this  capacity  was  winning  the  name  of  the  greatest  finance  cheauer 
minister  since  Peel,   and  was   laying  deep   the   foundations 
of  his  later  power.      His  policy  was  economy,  and  the  com- 
pletion  of  the  free   trade  policy,  which  he  believed  would 
augment  the  prosperity  of  England. 

By  the  year  1860  the  tariff  list  had  been  reduced  to  48 
articles.  Largely  through  Gladstone's  efforts  the  excise 
duty  on  paper  was  abolished,  thus  furthering  the  publica- 
tion of  books  and  papers  at  a  price  within  the  reach  of  the 
masses.  Gladstone  also  carried  through  a  great  scheme  postal 
of  using  the  post  offices  of  England  as  savings  banks.  Thus  savings 
each  locality  could  have  its  saving  banks  without  the  crea- 
tion of  an  entirely  new  and  elaborate  machinery.  The 
system  went  into  force  in  1861,  and  has  proved  very  success- 
ful in  encouraging  thrift  among  the  working  classes.  Be- 
fore the  end  of  1862,  180,000  accounts  had  been  opened. 
Since  then  the  deposits  have  increased  each  year.  In  1907 
these  postal  savings  banks  had  deposits  of  £157,500,000, 
and  the  number  of  depositors  was  nearly  10,700,000.  De- 
posits may  be  made  from  a  shilling  upward.  The  interest 
is  small,  but  the  security,  that  of  the  State,  is  perfect.  Every 
little  hamlet  thus  has  its  institution  for  savings,  the  local 
post  office.  Walpole  calls  this  use  of  the  post  office  "  the 
most  efficient  machinery  for  the  encouragement  of  thrift 
that  the  world  had  ever  seen,  or  the  imagination  of  man 
had  ever  conjectured."  Two  years  later,  in  1864,  Mr. 
Gladstone  was  able  to  follow  up  this  success  by  another,  g^ate 
using  the  same  machinery  of  the  post  office  for  the  selling  insurance, 
of  small  life  insurance  policies,  to  the  maximum  amount  of 
a  hundred  pounds.  Thus  workingmen  with  small  incomes 
were  enabled  to  insure  their  lives  cheaply,  and  with  a  sense 
of  absolute  safety. 


460       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 

Industrial  While  from  the  point  of  view  of  politics,  of  internal  re- 

forms effected  by  legislation,  this  period,  from  1846  to  1866, 

progress.  J^  unusually  barren  and  insignificant,  changes  of  great  im- 
portance were  occurring  in  the  domain  of  industry  and  sci- 
ence. The  printing  press  was  being  perfected,  which  cheap- 
ened A'^astly  the  cost  of  production  of  newspapers  and  books, 
rendering  the  large  circulation  possible,  which  is  so  character- 
istic and  vital  a  feature  of  the  modern  world,  and  which  has 
contributed  immensely  to  the  democratic  evolution  of  Eng- 
land. Railway  construction  advanced  rapidly,  the  drawing 
power  of  locomotives  was  greatly  augmented,  iron  ships 
were  supplanting  wooden,  machinery  was  applied  to  agri- 
culture, the  sewing  machine,  which  astonishingly  lightened 
the  work  of  the  home,  and  which  inaugurated  a  revolution 
in  the  clothing  trade,  was  being  very  widely  adopted,  imple- 
ments of  war  were  being  increased  in  power  and  deadliness. 
During  this  period  the  Atlantic  Cable  was  finally  laid, 
after  great  and  distressing  failures,  by  an  American,  Cyrus 
Field,  supported  by  British  capitalists.  As  a  consequence, 
cables  were  later  laid  in  every  direction,  which  w^ere  to  bind 
the  whole  world  together  by  their  rapid  transmission  of 
news,  profoundly  altering  the  conditions  of  commerce  and 
international  relations.^ 

During  the  period  of  transition  just  described,  England 
was  outgrowing  old  forms  of  thought  and  organization, 
was  evidently  tending  toward  democracy.  Yet  this  general 
trend  was  not  mirrored  in  her  political  life  and  institu- 
tions. Parliament  remained  what  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832 
had  made  it.  From  1832  to  1867  there  was  no  altera- 
tion either  in  the  franchise  or  in  the  distribution  of  seats 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  This  was  the  era  of  middle  class 
rule,  as  its  predecessor  had  been  one  of  aristocratic  rule. 

But  during  this  period  the  demand  was  frequently  made 
that  the  suffrage  be  extended.       Not  more  than  one  man 

^  On  this  remarkable  chapter  of  history  see  Walpole,  History  of 
Twenty-five  Years,  I,  Ch.  7. 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  THE  SUFFRAGE      461 

in  six  then  had  the  right  to  vote.  The  demand  was  pressed  The  demand 
by  the  Chartists  from  1838  to  1848.  After  that,  from  ^^^^^^ 
time  to  time,  proposals  were  made  in  Parliament  to  suflfrage. 
enlarge  the  electorate.  Bills  to  this  effect  were  introduced 
in  1852,  1854,  1859,  and  1860,  but  none  of  them  pro- 
gressed far.  Both  parties  treated  them  gingerly  and  with 
trepidation.  Furthermore,  the  exceptional  position  held  by 
one  man  in  English  public  life  during  these  years,  Lord  Palm- 
crston,  was  a  deterrent,  for  Palmerston  was  strongly  opposed 
to  change  in  the  institutions  of  England.  So  commanding 
was  his  personality  that  it  came  in  a  way  to  be  tacitly 
understood  that  no  change  should  be  attempted  as  long  as 
he  remained  in  politics.  But  in  1865  Lord  Palmerston 
died,  and  shortly  afterward  Lord  Derby  and  Earl  Russell 
passed  from  the  scene  of  politics.  In  place  of  the  old- 
time  statesmen,  two  younger  men,  neither  of  whom  feared 
innovation,  occupied  the  center  of  the  stage,  Gladstone  and 
Disraeli.  Their  rivalry  constitutes  the  central  thread  of 
parliamentary  history  for  many  years. 

Then,  too,  the  success  of  the  United  States  in  the  Civil  Effect  of 
War  greatly  encouraged  the  democratic  party  in  England,  ^ 
for  it  was  considered  a  triumph  of  democracy  over  aris- 
tocracy. Moreover,  in  that  war  the  sympathy  of  the  work- 
ing classes  in  England  had  been  steadfastly  with  the  North, 
though  they  suffered  greatly  from  the  war,  while  the  upper 
classes  had  largely  favored  the  South.  The  people,  in 
other  words,  had  been  right,  when  the  favored  class  had 
not,  and  when  the  ministry  had  so  handled  its  relations  with 
the  United  States  as  to  leave  an  ugly  feeling  and  a  grave 
diplomatic  difficulty  behind  to  harass  the  coming  years. 
Were  not  people  who  had  shown  such  moral  and  intellectual 
qualities  worthy  of  any  share  in  the  government  of  England.'* 
Thus  the  question  of  the  further  extension  of  the  suffrage 
came  once  more  prominently  before  the  English  people  and 
Parliament. 

In  1866  Mr.  Gladstone,  leader  of  the  House  of  Commons, 


462       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 


Gladstone 
introduces 
a  reform 
biU. 


The   bill 
defeated. 


under  Earl  Russell  as  prime  minister,  brought  forward 
a  bill  to  enlarge  the  electorate.  Earl  Russell  had  himself 
of  recent  years  been  favorable  to  reform.  By  the  bill  of 
1832  the  suffrage  was  given  in  the  boroughs  to  those  owning 
or  "  occupying "  houses  or  buildings  yielding  ten  pounds 
a  year.  From  1832  to  1867  England  was  consequently 
ruled  by  the  "  ten  pound  householders."  But  five  out  of 
every  six  men  could  not  meet  this  qualification,  and  were, 
therefore,  without  political  power.  The  masses  of  working- 
men  could  not  afford  to  pay  ten  pounds  a  year  for  the 
houses  in  which  they  lived. 

The  measure  now  introduced  proposed  but  a  slight  change. 
In  boroughs  the  suffrage  was  to  be  extended  to  seven  pound 
householders.  This  would  add  only  about  150,000  to  the 
number  of  voters.  The  county  franchise  was  not  to  be 
treated  even  as  liberally  as  the  borough.  The  timidity  of 
this  measure,  and  the  half-hearted  way  in  which  it  was  urged, 
encouraged  all  the  opponents  of  change,  and  failed  to  arouse 
any  counteracting  interest  among  the  unenfranchised  out- 
side of  Parliament.  The  Conservatives  were  united  against 
it,  and  a  body  of  the  Liberals  joined  them.  There  was  no 
sign  that  the  people  wanted  the  measure,  therefore  this 
coalition  did  not  hesitate  to  defeat  it.  The  ministry 
resigned  and  Derby  became  prime  minister,  with  Disraeli  as 
leader  of  the  House  of  Commons.  The  Conservatives  were 
now  in  power,  and  the  opponents  of  reform  thought  that  they 
had  effectually  stemmed  the  advance  toward  democracy. 
Never  were  politicians  more  completely  deceived.  The 
people  instantly  became  alert  and  indignant  at  the  rejection 
of  even  so  modest  a  measure.  Gladstone,  in  his  final  speech 
on  the  bill,  had  exclaimed  defiantly  to  his  opponents,  "  You 
cannot  fight  against  the  future;  time  is  on  our  side,"  a 
phrase  that  now  became  a  battle  cry.  Gladstone,  aroused, 
lost  all  his  timidity  and  became  a  fiery  apostle  of  an  extensive 
reform.  A  determined  effort  was  made  to  influence  the 
people,  and  it  succeeded. 


REFORM  BILL  OF  1867  463 

Mr.  Bright,  with  ill-concealed  menace,  incited  the  people 
to  renew  the  scenes  of  1832.  "  You  know  what  your  fathers 
did  thirty-four  years  ago,  and  you  know  the  result.  The 
men  who,  in  every  speech  they  utter,  insult  the  workingmen, 
describing  them  as  a  multitude  given  up  to  ignorance  and 
vice,  will  be  the  first  to  yield  when  the  popular  will  is 
loudly  and  resolutely  expressed.  If  Parliament  Street,  from 
Charing  Cross  to  the  venerable  Abbey,  were  filled  with  men 
seeking  a  Reform  Bill  these  slanderers  of  their  countrymen 
would  learn  to  be  civil,  if  they  did  not  learn  to  love  free- 
dom." Under  the  influence  of  such  incitement  the  people 
speedily  lost  their  indiff'erence,  and  great  popular  demonstra- 
tions of  the  familiar  kind  occurred  in  favor  of  the  bill. 
The  people  were  manifestly  in  earnest. 

Seeing  this,  and  feeling  that  reform  was  inevitable,  and  Reform 

that,   such   being   the   case,   the   Conservative   party   might  earned  by 

/»  ••  Till  jJisr«iCii« 

as  well  reap  the  advantages  oi  grantmg  it  as  to  allow  those 

advantages  to  accrue  to  others,  Disraeli  in  the  following 
year,  1867,  introduced  a  reform  bill.  This  was  remodeled 
almost  entirely  by  the  Liberals,  who,  led  by  Gladstone,  de- 
feated the  proposals  of  the  ministry  time  after  time,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  having  their  own  principles  incorporated  in  the 
measure.  The  bill  as  finally  passed  was  largely  the  work  of 
Gladstone,  practically  everything  he  asked  being  in  the  end 
conceded,  but  it  was  the  audacity  and  subtlety  and  resource- 
fulness of  Disraeli  that  succeeded  in  getting  a  very  radical 
bill  adopted  by  the  very  same  legislators  who  the  year  before 
had  rejected  a  moderate  one. 

The  bill  as  finally  passed  In  August,  1867,  closed  the  Provisions 
rule  of  the  middle  class  in  England,  and  made  England  a  °^  *^® 
democracy.  The  franchise  in  boroughs  was  given  to  all 
householders.  Thus,  instead  of  ten  pound  or  seven  pound 
householders,  all  householders,  whatever  the  value  of  their 
houses,  were  admitted ;  also,  all  lodgers  who  had  occupied 
for  a  year  lodgings  of  the  value,  unfurnished,  of  ten  pounds, 
or  about  a  dollar  a  week.      In  the  counties  the  suffrage 


464       ENGLAND  BETWEEN  TWO  REFORMS 

was  given  to  all  those  who  owned  property  yielding  five 
pounds  clear  income  a  year,  rather  than  ten  pounds,  a^ 
previously ;  and  to  all  occupiers  who  paid  at  least  twelve 
pounds,  rather  than  fifty  pounds,  as  hitherto.  Thus  the 
better  class  of  laborers  in  the  boroughs,  and  practically  all 
tenant  farmers  in  the  counties,  received  the  vote.  By  this 
bill  the  number  of  voters  was  nearly  doubled.^ 

So  sweeping  was  the  measure  that  the  prime  minister  him- 
self. Lord  Derby,  called  it  a  "  leap  in  the  dark."  Carlyle, 
forecasting  a  dismal  future,  called  it  "  shooting  Niagara." 
Robert  Lowe,  whose  memorable  attacks  had  been  largely 
instrumental  in  defeating  the  meager  measure  of  the  year 
before,  now  said,  "  we  must  educate  our  masters."  It  should 
be  noted  that  during  the  debates  on  this  bill,  John  Stuart 
Mill  made  a  strongly  reasoned  speech  in  favor  of  granting 
the  suffrage  to  women.  The  House  considered  the  proposi- 
tion highly  humorous.  Nevertheless,  this  movement,  then 
in  its  very  beginning,  was  destined  to  persist  and  grow. 

Acts,  similar  in  principle  though  differing  in  detail,  were 

passed  in  1868  for  Scotland  and  Ireland. 

Redistribu-        Also  there  was  at  this  time  some  redistribution  of  seats 

from  small  boroughs  to  large  towns  and  counties.      There 
seats.  .     .  °  °       , 

is  little  doubt  that  the  Conservatives  expected  to  be  rewarded 
for  passing  the  Reform  Bill  of  1867,  as  the  Liberals  had 
been  for  passing  that  of  1832,  thought,  that  is,  that  the 
newly  enfranchised  would,  out  of  gratitude,  continue  them 
in  office.  If  so,  they  were  destined  to  a  great  disappoint- 
ment. The  elections  of  1868  resulted  in  giving  the  Liberals 
a  majority  of  a  hundred  and  twenty.  Mr.  Gladstone  now 
became  the  head  of  the  most  notable  Liberal  ministry  of 
modern  times. 

'  Just  before  1867  the  county  voters  numbered  768,705 ;  the  borough 
voters  602,088.  By  1871  the  former  had  increased  to  1,055,467;  the 
latter  to  1,470,956. 


CHAPTER  XX 
ENGLAND  UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

Mr.  Gladstone  possessed  a  more  commanding  majority  The  Great 
than  any  prime  minister  had  had  since  1832.  As  the  en-  Ministry, 
largement  of  the  franchise  in  1832  had  been  succeeded  by 
a  period  of  bold  and  sweeping  reforms,  so  was  that  of  1867 
to  be.  Mr.  Gladstone  was  a  perfect  representative  of  the 
prevailing  national  mood.  The  recent  campaign  had  shown 
that  the  people  were  ready  for  a  period  of  reform,  of  im- 
portant constructive  legislation.  Supported  by  such  a  ma- 
jority, and  by  a  public  opinion  so  vigorous  and  enthusiastic, 
Gladstone  stood  forth  master  of  the  situation.  No  states- 
man could  hope  to  have  more  favorable  conditions  attend 
his  entrance  into  power.  He  was  the  head  of  a  strong, 
united,  and  resolute  party.  The  ministry  contained  a  re- 
markable array  of  able  men.  Mr.  Bright  was  there,  one 
of  the  most  eloquent  orators  who  have  spoken  the  English 
tongue ;  Mr.  Forster,  Mr.  Goschen,  Mr.  Lowe,  and  Lord 
Clarendon  were  also  members. 

The  man  who  thus  became  prime  minister  at  the  age  of 

fifty-nine  was  one  of  the  notable  figures  of  modem  English 

history.     His  parents  were  Scotch.     His  father  had  hewed 

out   his    own    career,    and    from    small   beginnings    had,   by 

energy  and  talent,  made  himself  one  of  the  wealthiest  and 

most  influential  men  in  Liverpool,   and  had  been  elected  a 

member  of  Parliament.    Young  William  Ewart  Gladstone  re-  ■v^iniam 

ceived  "  the  best  education  then  going  "  at  Eton  College  and  Ewart 

Oxford  University,  in  both  of  which  institutions  he  stood  out  ^^^^dstone, 

1809-1898 
among  his  fellows.     At  Eton  his  most  intimate  friend  was 

Arthur  Hallam,  the  man  whose  splendid  eulogy  is  Tennyson's 

465 


466       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


Entrance 

into 

Parliament. 


leader  of 
the  Liberal 
Party. 


Gladstone's 
First 
Ministry, 
1868-1874. 


In  Memoriam.  His  career  at  Oxford  was  crowned  by  brilliant 
scholarly  successes,  and  here  he  also  distinguished  him- 
self as  a  speaker  in  the  Union,  the  university  debating  club. 
In  one  of  the  discussions  he  denounced  the  Reform  Bill  of 
1832,  then  pending  in  Parliament,  as  destined  to  change 
the  form  of  government  and  subvert  the  social  order.  Be- 
fore leaving  the  university  his  thought  and  inclination  were 
to  take  orders  in  the  church,  but  his  father  was  opposed  to 
this  and  the  son  yielded.  In  1833  he  took  his  seat  in  the 
House  of  Commons  as  representative  for  one  of  the  rotten 
boroughs  which  the  Reform  Bill  of  the  previous  year  had 
not  abolished.  He  was  to  be  a  member  of  that  body  for 
over  sixty  years,  and  for  more  than  half  that  time  its 
leading  member.  Before  attaining  the  premiership,  there- 
fore, in  1868,  he  had  had  a  long  political  career  and  a  varied 
training,  had  held  many  offices,  culminating  in  the  Chancellor- 
ship of  the  Exchequer  and  the  leadership  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  Beginning  as  a  Consei'vative  (Macaulay  called 
him  in  1838  the  "  rising  hope  of  the  stem  and  unbending 
Tories  "),  he  came  under  the  influence  of  Sir  Robert  Peel,  a 
man  who,  conservative  by  instinct,  was  gifted  with  unusual 
prescience  and  adaptability,  and  who  possessed  the  courage 
required  to  be  inconsistent,  the  wisdom  to  change  as  the 
world  changed.  Gladstone  had,  after  a  long  period  of  transi- 
tion, landed  in  the  opposite  camp,  and  was  now  the  leader 
of  the  Liberal  Party.  By  reason  of  his  business  ability, 
shown  in  the  management  of  the  nation's  finances,  his  knowl- 
edge of  parliamentary  history  and  procedure,  his  moral 
fervor,  his  elevation  of  tone,  his  intrepidity  and  courage, 
his  reforming  spirit,  and  his  remarkable  eloquence,  he  was 
eminently  qualified  for  leadership.  When  almost  sixty 
he  became  prime  minister,  a  position  he  was  destined  to 
fill  four  times,  displaying  marvelous  intellectual  and  physical 
energy.  His  administration,  lasting  from  1868-1874,  is 
called  the  Great  Ministry.  The  key  to  his  policy  is  found 
in  his   remark  to  a  friend  when  the  summons   came   from 


THE  COMPLEX  PROBLEM  OF  IRELAND    467 

the  Queen   for  him  to   form   a   ministry :    "  My   mission   is  Dominance 
to   pacify  Ireland."       The   Irish  question,   in   fact,   was   to  °^  ^"^^ 
be   the   most    absorbing   interest   of   Mr.    Gladstone's    later 
political  career,  dominating  all  four  of  his  ministries. 

To  understand  the  question,  a  brief  survey  of  Irish  history 
in  the  nineteenth  century  is  necessary.  Ireland  was  all 
through  the  century  the  most  discontented  and  wretched 
part  of  the  British  Empire.  While  England  constantly 
grew  in  numbers  and  wealth,  Ireland  decreased  in  popula- 
tion, and  her  misery  increased.  In  1815  Ireland  was  in- 
habited by  two  peoples,  the  native  Irish,  who  were  Catholics, 
and  settlers  from  England  and  Scotland,  who  were  for  the 
most  part  Anglicans  or  Presbyterians.  The  latter  were 
a  small  but  powerful  minority. 

The  fundamental  cause  of  the  Irish  question  lies  in  the 

fact  that  Ireland   is   a   conquered   country,   that   the   Irish  Ireland  a 

are  a  subiect  race.      As  early  as  the  twelfth  century  the  co^l^^^^ea 

.  1       .  ■;      ,      country. 

English  began   to   invade   the  island.       Attempts   made  by 

the  Irish  at  various  times  during  six  hundred  years  to 
repel  and  drive  out  the  invaders  only  resulted  in  rendering 
their  subjection  more  complete  and  more  galling.  Irish 
insurrections  have  been  pitilessly  punished,  and  race  hatred 
has  been  the  consuming  emotion  in  Ireland  for  centuries. 
The  contest  has  been  unequal,  owing  to  the  far  greater  re- 
sources of  England  during  all  this  time.  The  result  of 
this  turbulent  history  was  that  in  1815  the  Irish  were  a 
subject  people  in  their  own  land,  as  they  had  been  for 
centuries,  and  that  there  were  several  evidences  of  this 
so  conspicuous  and  so  burdensome  that  most  Irishmen  could 
not  pass  a  day  without  feeling  the  bitterness  of  their  situa- 
tion. It  was  a  hate-laden  atmosphere  which  they  breathed. 
The  marks   of  subjection   were   various.      The   Irish   did  The 

not  own  the  land  of  Ireland,  which  had  once  belonged  to  ^^^^"^^ 

°  question, 

their  ancestors.      The  various  conquests  by  English  rulers 

had  been   followed  by   extensive   confiscations   of  the   land. 

Particularly  extensive  was  that  of  Cromwell.      These  lands 


468        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


The 

religious 

question. 


The 

political 

question. 


were  given  in  large  estates  to  Englishmen.  The  Irish  were 
mere  tenants,  and  most  of  them  tenants-at-will,  on  lands  that 
now  belonged  to  others.  The  Irish  have  always  regarded 
themselves  as  the  rightful  owners  of  the  soil  of  Ireland,  have 
regarded  the  English  landlords  as  usurpers,  and  have  de- 
sired to  recover  possession  for  themselves.  Hence  there  has 
arisen  the  agrarian  question,  a  part  of  the  general  Irish 
problem. 

Again,  in  1815  the  Irish  were  the  victims  of  religious  in- 
tolerance. At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  they  remained 
Catholic,  while  the  English  separated  from  Rome.  At- 
tempts to  force  the  Anglican  Church  upon  them  only  stif- 
fened their  opposition.  Nevertheless,  in  1815  they  were 
paying  tithes  to  the  Anglican  Church  in  Ireland,  though 
they  were  themselves  ardent  Catholics,  never  entered  a 
Protestant  church,  and  were  supporting  their  own  churches 
by  voluntary  gifts.  Thus  they  contributed  to  two  churches, 
one  alien,  which  they  hated,  and  one  to  which  they  were 
devoted.  Thus  a  part  of  the  Irish  problem  was  the  re- 
ligious question. 

Again,  in  1815  the  Irish  did  not  make  the  laws  which 
governed  them.  In  1800  their  separate  Parliament  in  Dub- 
lin was  abolished,  and  from  1801  there  was  only  one  Par- 
liament in  Great  Britain,  that  in  London.  While  Ireland 
henceforth  had  its  quota  of  representatives  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  it  was  always  a  hopeless  minority.  More- 
over, the  Irish  members  did  not  really  represent  the  large 
majority  of  the  Irish,  as  no  Catholic  could  sit  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  There  was  this  strange  anomaly  that,  while 
the  majority  of  the  Irish  could  vote  for  members  of  Parlia- 
ment, they  must  vote  for  Protestants — a  bitter  mockery. 
The  Irish  demanded  the  right  to  govern  themselves.  Thus 
another  aspect  of  the  problem  was  purely  political. 

The  abuse  just  mentioned  was  removed  in  1829,^  when  Cath- 

*  Catholics  were  permitted  to  hold  offices  after  1828  by  the  abolition 
of  the  Test  Acts. 


THE  IRISH  FAMINE  469 

olic  Emancipation  was  carried,  wliich  henceforth  permitted  Catholic 
Catholics  to  sit  in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  English  °^*"^^P^' 
statesmen  granted  this  concession  only  when  forced  to  do  so 
by  the  imminent  danger  of  civil  war.  The  Irish  consequently 
felt  no  gratitude.  Moreover,  at  the  moment  when  Catholics 
were  being  admitted  to  Parliament,  most  of  them  lost  their 
vote  by  the  much  higher  franchise  qualification  enacted  at 
the  same  time,  for  the  qualification  was  raised  in  Ireland 
from  forty  shillings  to  ten  pounds,  though  for  England  it 
remained  at  forty  shillings.  Shortly  after  Catholic  Emanci- 
pation had  been  achieved,  the  Irish,  under  the  matchless 
leadership  of  O'Connell,  endeavored  by  much  the  same  meth- 
ods to  obtain  the  repeal  of  the  Union  between  England  and  The  repeal 
Ireland,  effected  in  1801,  and  to  win  back  a  separate  legis-  "movement, 
lature  and  a  large  measure  of  independence.  This  move- 
ment, for  some  time  very  formidable,  failed  completely, 
owing  to  the  iron  determination  of  the  English  that  the 
union  should  not  be  broken,  and  to  the  fact  that  the  leader, 
O'Connell,  was  not  willing  in  last  resort  to  risk  civil  war 
to  accomplish  the  result,  recognizing  the  hopelessness  of  such  a 
contest.  This  movement  came  to  an  end  in  1843.  However, 
a  number  of  the  younger  followers  of  O'Connell,  chagrined  at 
his  peaceful  methods,  formed  a  society  called  "  Young  Ire- 
land," the  aim  of  which  was  Irish  independence  and  a  repub- 
lic. They  rose  in  revolt  in  the  troubled  year,  1848.  The 
revolt,  however,  was  easily  put  down. 

As  if  Ireland  did  not  suffer  enough  from  political  and 
social  evils,  an  appalling  catastrophe  of  nature  was  added. 
The  Irish  famine  of  1845-7,  to  which  reference  has  already  The  Irish 
been  made,  was  a  tragic  calamity,  far-reaching  in  its  famine, 
effects.  The  repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws  did  not  check  it. 
The  distress  continued  for  several  years,  though  gradually 
growing  less.  The  potato  crop  of  1846  was  inferior  to  that 
of  1845,  and  the  harvests  of  1848  and  1849  were  far  from 
normal.  Charity  sought  to  aid,  but  was  insufficient.  The 
government  gave  money,  and  later  gave  rations.     In  March 


470        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

18-i7  over  700,000  people  were  receiving  government  sup- 
port. In  March  and  April  of  that  year  the  deaths  in 
the  workhouses  alone  were  more  than  ten  thousand  a  month. 
Peasants  ate  roots  and  lichens,  or  flocked  to  the  cities  in 
the  agony  of  despair,  hoping  for  relief.  Multitudes  fled 
to  England  or  crowded  the  emigrant  ships  to  America, 
dying  by  the  thousand  of  fever  or  exhaustion.  It  was  a 
long  drawn  out  horror,  and  when  it  was  over  it  was  found 
Decline  of     that  the  population  had  decreased  from  about  8,300,000  in 

the   popula-  1845  to  less  than  6,600,000  in  1851.      Since  then  the  de- 
tion.  .  .  . 

crease  occasioned  by  emigration  has  continued.      By  1881 

the  population  had  fallen  to  5,100,000,  by  1891  to  4,700,- 
000,  by  1901  to  about  4,450,000.  Since  1851  perhaps 
4,000,000  Irish  have  emigrated.  Ireland,  indeed,  is  probably 
the  only  country  whose  population  decreased  in  the  nine- 
teenth century. 

For  many  years  after  the  famine,  and  the  failure  of 
"  Young  Ireland "  in  1848,  Irish  politics  were  quiescent. 
Year  after  year  the  ceaseless  emigration  to  the  United  States 
continued.  Finally,  there  was  organized  among  the  Irish 
The  Fenian  in  America  a  secret  society,  called  the  Fenians,  whose  pur- 
movement,  pose  was  to  achieve  the  independence  of  the  republic  of 
Ireland.  The  Irish  in  the  two  countries  co-operated,  and 
in  1865  and  1866  were  active.  James  Stephens,  the  leader 
in  Ireland,  announced  that  the  flag  of  the  Irish  republic 
would  be  raised  in  1865.  The  Government,  alarmed,  took 
stringent  measures,  arresting  many  of  the  leaders,  and  even 
securing  from  Parliament  the  suspension  of  the  Habeas 
Corpus  Act  in  Ireland.  In  May  1866  the  Fenians  in 
the  United  States  attempted  an  invasion  of  Canada.  About 
1,200  of  them  crossed  the  Niagara  River,  but  were  soon 
driven  back,  though  only  after  blood  had  been  shed.  Several, 
taken  prisoners,  were  tried  by  courts-martial  and  shot.  In 
1867  various  Fenian  outrages  occurred  In  Ireland  and  in 
England.  There  were  many  arrests,  trials,  and  some  execu- 
tions.     The  chief  significance  of  the  Fenian  movement  was 


THE  IRISH  CHURCH  471 

the  alarm  it  aroused  in  England,  and  the  vivid  evidence 
it  gave  of  the  unrest  and  deep-rooted  discontent  of  Ireland. 
The  Irish  question  thus  became  again  an  exciting  topic  for 
discussion,  a  problem  pressing  upon  Parliament  for  solution. 

When  Gladstone  came  into  power  in  1868  he  was  resolved 
to  pacify  the  Irish  by  removing  some  of  their  more  pro-  The  ¥pas 
nounced  grievances,  the  three  branches  of  the  Irish  Upas  tree,  *^^®* 
as  he  called  them — ^the  Irish  Church,  the  Irish  land  laws,  and 
Irish  education. 

The  question  of  the  Irish  Church  was  the  first  one  attacked.  The  Irish 
This  was  the  Anglican  Church  established  and  endowed  in  Church. 
Ireland  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  It  was  a  branch 
of  the  Church  of  England.  Its  position  was  anomalous. 
It  was  a  state  church,  yet  it  was  the  church  not  of  the 
people,  but  of  a  small  minority.  Established  to  win  over 
the  Catholics  to  Protestantism,  it  had  signally  failed  of 
its  purpose.  Its  members  numbered  less  than  an  eighth 
of  the  population.  There  were  many  parishes,  about  150, 
in  which  there  was  not  a  single  member.  There  were  nearly 
900  in  which  there  were  less  than  fifty  members.  Yet  these 
places  were  provided  with  an  Anglican  clergyman  and  a 
place  of  worship,  generally  the  foraier  Catholic  church 
building.  The  Church  was  maintained  by  its  endowment 
and  by  the  tithes  which  the  Catholics,  as  well  as  the  Protest- 
ants, paid.  Sidney  Smith  said  of  this  institution :  "  On 
an  Irish  Sabbath  the  bell  of  the  neat  parish  church  often 
summons  to  service  only  the  parson  and  an  occasional  con- 
forming clerk;  while  two  hundred  yards  off,  a  thousand 
Catholics  are  huddled  together  in  a  miserable  hovel,  and 
pelted  by  all  the  storms  of  heaven,"  and  he  added,  "  There  is 
no  abuse  like  it  in  all  Europe,  in  all  Asia,  in  all  the  discovered 
parts  of  Africa,  and  in  all  that  we  have  heard  of  Tim- 
buctoo."  This  favored  corporation  did  not  even  discharge 
its  religious  functions  with  zeal.  Many  a  clergyman  used 
his  position  simply  for  the  salary  attached,  employed  a 
curate  to  perform  his  duties,  and  himself  lived  in  England. 


472       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

The  tithe  The  Irish  resisted  the  payment  of  tithes,  and  the  result  was 
the  so-called  tithe  war,  in  which  the  peasant's  property, 
his  cow  or  goat,  his  chickens  or  kettles,  were  seized  and 
sold  for  payment.  Even  such  methods  were  not  successful. 
In  1833  only  about  12,000  out  of  104,000  pounds  due 
could  be  collected.  At  length,  in  1838,  the  system  was 
abandoned.  The  tithes  were  made  a  tax  upon  the  land, 
which  simply  meant  that  the  peasants  no  longer  paid  them 
directly,  but  paid  them  indirectly  in  the  form  of  the  in- 
creased rent  demanded  by  the  landlord.  The  Catholics 
were  still  supporters  of  a  wealthy  and  alien  corporation. 
Meanwhile,  their  own  priests  were  exceedingly  poor,  and  their 
own  serv'ices  had  to  be  held  in  the  open  air  or  in  wretched 
buildings.  The  existence  of  this  alien  church  was  regarded 
as  humiliating  and  oppressive. 

Gladstone  in  1869  procured  the  passage  of  a  law  abolish- 
Disestab-  'mg  tithes,  even  in  this  roundabout  form,  and  disestablishing 
.,     J.  .  and  partly  disendowing  the  Church.     The  Church  henceforth 

Church.  ceased   to   be    connected   with    the    State.     Its    bishops    lost 

their  seats  in  the  House  of  Lords.  It  became  a  voluntary 
organization  and  was  permitted  to  retain  a  large  part  of  its 
property  as  an  endowment.  The  rest  was  to  be  appropriated 
as  Parliament  should  direct.  It  was  to  have  all  the  church 
buildings  which  it  had  formerly  possessed.  It  was  still  very 
rich,  but  the  connection  with  the  Church  of  England  was  to 
cease  January  1,  1871.  The  bill,  though  very  favorable  to 
the  Church,  was  denounced  as  sheer  robbery,  as  "  highly  offen- 
sive to  Almighty  God,"  as  the  "  greatest  national  sin  ever  com- 
mitted." Nevertheless,  it  passed  and  became  law.  One 
branch  of  the  famous  Upas  tree  had  been  lopped  off. 

Gladstone  now  approached  a  far  more  serious  and  per- 
System  of  plexing  problem — the  system  of  land  tenure.  Ireland  was 
almost  exclusively  an  agi'icultural  country,  yet  the  land 
was  chiefly  owned,  not  by  those  who  lived  on  it  and  tilled 
it,  but  by  a  comparatively  small  number  of  landlords,  who 
held  large  estates.     Many   of  these  were   Englishmen,   ab- 


land  tenure. 


THE  LAND  QUESTION  473 

sentees,  who  rarely  or  never  came  to  Ireland,  and  who  re- 
garded their  estates  simply  as  so  many  sources  of  revenue. 
The  business  relations  with  their  tenants  were  carried  on  by 
agents  or  bailiffs,  whose  treatment  of  the  tenants  was  fre- 
quently harsh  and  exasperating.  In  the  minds  of  the  Irish 
their  landlords  were  foreigners,  who  had  acquired  by  robbery 
land  which  they  regarded  as  rightly  belonging  to  themselves. 
This  initial  injustice  they  never  forgot.  There  had  been 
from  the  beginning  a  wide  gulf  between  the  two.  As,  how- 
ever, there  were  almost  no  industries  in  Ireland,  the  inhab- 
itants were  obliged  to  have  land.  They  were,  therefore,  in  an  The  land 
economic  sense,  at  the  mercy  of  the  landlord.  There  was, 
properly  speaking,  no  competition  among  landowners  to  rent 
their  land,  forcing  them,  therefore,  to  treat  their  tenants  with 
some  liberality  and  consideration.  There  was  competition 
only  among  the  applicants  for  land,  applicants  so  numerous 
that  they  would  offer  to  pay  much  more  for  a  little  plot  on 
which  to  raise  their  potatoes,  which  furnished  the  chief  food, 
than  the  value  of  the  land  justified.  The  result  was  that  in 
many  cases  they  could  not  pay  the  stipulated  rent  and  were 
evicted.  Their  position  only  became  still  more  deplorable, 
for  land  they  must  have  or  starve ;  consequently,  they  would 
promise  a  higher  rent  to  some  other  landlord,  with,  in 
the  end,  another  eviction  as  a  result.  Now,  eviction  was 
easy,  because  these  petty  farmers  were  tenants-at-will,  that  Tenants-at» 
is,  tenants  who  must  leave  their  holdings  at  the  will  and  will, 
pleasure  of  the  landlord,  or  on  short  notice,  generally  six 
months,  obviously  a  most  insecure  form  of  tenure.  Lands 
were  not  rented  for  a  year  or  five  years  or  ten,  but  only 
as  long  as  the  owner  should  see  fit.  Occupation  could  be 
terminated  abruptly  by  the  landlord,  starvation  faced  the 
peasant.  Moreover,  Irish  landlords  rented,  as  was  cor- 
rectly stated  at  the  time,  not  farms,  that  is,  land  and  the 
necessary  buildings  and  improvements,  but  simply  land. 
The  tenant  put  up  at  his  own  expense  such  buildings  and  made 
such  improvements  in  the  way  of  fences,  draining,  clearing, 


474        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


No    compen- 
sation for 
improve- 
ments. 


Industry 
and  thrift 
penalized. 


Misery  of 
the  peas- 
antry. 


Deeds  of 
violence. 


fertilizing,  as  he  could,  or  wished ;  in  very  many  cases  the  land 
would  have  had  no  value  whatever,  but  for  these  improve- 
ments. Yet,  as  the  law  then  stood,  when  a  landlord  evicted 
his  tenant  he  was  not  obliged  to  pay  for  any  buildings 
or  improvements  made  during  the  tenant's  occupation.  He 
simply  appropriated  so  much  property  created  by  the  tenant. 

It  would  be  hard  to  conceive  a  more  unwise  or  unjust 
system.  It  encouraged  indolence  and  slothfulness.  The  land 
was  wretchedly  cultivated,  because  good  cultivation  of  it  was 
penalized.  Why  should  a  tenant  work  hard  to  improve  the 
quality  of  his  holding,  to  erect  desirable  farm  buildings,  when 
he  knew  that  this  would  merely  mean  a  higher  rent  or  his  e\ac- 
tion  in  favor  of  some  one  who  would  offer  a  higher  rent,  in 
which  case  all  his  improvements  would  benefit  others  and  not 
himself  .P  In  other  words,  it  was  a  positive  disadvantage  to  a 
tenant  to  be  prosperous.  If  prosperous,  he  made  efforts  to 
conceal  the  fact,  as  did  the  peasants  in  pre-revolutionary 
France.  Now,  the  social  effects  of  this  system  were  dis- 
astrous in  the  extreme.  Chronic  and  shocking  misery  was  the 
lot  of  the  Irish  peasantry.  "  The  Irish  peasant,"  says  an 
official  English  document  of  the  time,  "  is  the  most  poorly 
nourished,  most  poorly  housed,  most  poorly  clothed  of  any  in 
Europe ;  he  has  no  reserve,  no  capital.  He  lives  from  day  to 
day."  His  house  was  generally  a  rude  stone  hut,  with  a  dirt 
floor.  The  census  of  1841  established  the  fact  that  in  the 
case  of  forty-six  per  cent,  of  the  population,  the  entire  family 
lived  in  a  house,  or,  more  properly,  hut  of  a  single  room. 
Frequently  the  room  served  also  as  a  barn  for  the  live  stock. 

Stung  by  the  misery  of  their  position,  and  by  the  in- 
justice of  the  laws  that  protected  the  landlord,  and  that 
gave  them  only  two  hard  alternatives,  sui*render  to  the 
landlord,  or  starvation,  and  believing  that  when  evicted 
they  were  also  robbed,  and  goaded  by  the  hopeless  outlook 
for  the  future,  the  Irish,  in  wild  rage,  committed  many 
atrocious  agrarian  crimes,  murders,  arson,  the  killing  or 
maiming  of  cattle.      This  in  turn  brought  a  new  coercion 


THE  LAND  ACT  OF  1870  475 

law  from  the  English  Parliament,  which  only  aggravated  the 
evil. 

Such  was  the  situation.  Mr.  Gladstone,  desiring  to  gov- 
ern Ireland,  not  according  to  English,  but  according  to 
Irish  ideas,  faced  it  resolutely.  He  had  an  important  argu- 
ment at  hand.  While  the  system  just  described  was  the 
one  prevailing  throughout  most  of  Ireland,  a  different  one 
had  grown  up  in  a  single  province,  Ulster,  the  so-called  The  Tllster 
system  of  "  tenant  right."  The  tenant's  right  was  un-  System, 
disturbed  possession  of  his  holding  as  long  as  he  paid  his 
rent,  and  fair  payment  for  all  permanent  improvements,  in 
case  he  should  relinquish  his  holding,  whether  voluntarily 
or  because  of  inability  to  pay  the  rent.  This  was  mere 
custom,  not  law.  But  the  result  was  that  the  peasants 
of  Ulster  were  hard-working  and  prosperous,  whereas  in 
the  rest  of  Ireland  the  contrary  was  the  case.  The  out- 
going peasant  received,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  for  his  improve- 
ments from  five  to  twenty  times  the  amount  of  his  annual 
rent.  It  paid  him,  therefore,  to  make  them.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone took  this  local  custom  and  made  it  a  law  for  all 
Ireland.  In  the  Land  Act  of  1870  it  was  provided  that  Land  Act  of 
if  evicted  for  any  other  reason  than  for  the  non-payment  of  ^^''^• 
rent,  the  tenant  could  claim  compensation  for  disturbance 
from  the  landlord,  and  also  that  he  was  to  receive  compensa- 
tion for  all  improvements  of  a  permanent  character  on  giving 
up  his  holding.  It  was  hoped  that  thus  the  peasants  would 
have  a  sense  of  security  in  their  occupation,  and  that  with 
security  would  come  prosperity  and  peace. 

There  were  certain  other  clauses  in  the  bill,  not  greatly 
approved  by  Gladstone,  but  strongly  urged  by  Mr.  Bright, 
whose  influence  with  the  people  Gladstone  did  not  wish  to 
alienate.  Bright  desired  that  the  Irish  peasants  should  The  Bright 
gradually  cease  to  be  tenants  of  other  people's  land,  and  clauses, 
should  become  landowners  themselves.  This  could  only  be 
done  by  purchasing  the  estates  of  the  landlords,  and  this 
obviously  the  peasants   were   unable  to   do.       The   Bright 


476        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


The  bill 
denounced 
as    revolu- 
tionary. 


The  land 
Act  a 
disappoint- 
ment. 


clauses,  therefore,  provided  that  the  State  sliould  help  the 
peasant  up  to  a  certain  amount,  he  in  turn  repaying  the 
State  for  the  money  loaned  by  easy  instalments,  covering  a 
long  period  of  years.  Accordingly,  carefully  guarded  land 
purchase  clauses  were  put  into  this  bill. 

The  bill  thus  proposed  went  through  Parliament  with 
comparative  ease.  On  one  point  it  was  vigorously  attacked, 
the  clause  giving  a  tenant  compensation  from  the  landlord 
if  the  landlord  evicted  him  for  any  other  reason  than 
for  the  non-payment  of  rent.  This,  said  Disraeli,  is  revolu- 
tionary. It  alters,  by  act  of  Parliament,  the  nature  of 
property,  the  thing  least  to  be  tampered  with  safely  by  legis- 
lation. The  landlord  may  no  longer  do  what  he  will  with 
his  own.  In  place  of  absolute  and  uncontrolled  ownership, 
you  make  the  tenant  part  owner,  for  he  can  not  be  evicted 
as  long  as  he  pays  his  rent.  You  create  a  hybrid  and 
dangerous  form  of  land  tenure,  dual  ownership.  If  you 
violate  the  sacredness  of  property  in  land,  you  may  do  it 
in  other  kinds,  and  thus  the  people  will  come  to  see  that 
they  can  acquire  property  not  alone  by  labor,  but  by  taking 
another's  by  act  of  Parliament.  To  which  the  reply  was 
that  one's  absolute  right  to  property  is  conditioned  upon 
its  conducing  to  the  public  welfare,  that  restrictions  may 
be  imposed  when  in  the  interest  of  society  as  a  whole,  and 
that  the  principle  of  the  factory  acts,  and  of  the  laws  regu- 
lating banking,  corporations,  trade  unions,  was  the  same.  It 
was  simply  now  being  applied  for  the  first  time  to  land. 

The  Land  Act  of  1870  did  not  achieve  what  was  hoped 
from  it;  did  not  bring  peace  to  Ireland.  Landlords  found 
ways  of  evading  it,  and  evictions  became  more  numerous 
than  ever.  The  act  did  not  forbid  landlords  to  raise  their 
rents,  and  did  not  guarantee  the  tenant  compensation  for 
disturbance  if  he  were  evicted  for  non-payment  of  rent, 
only  if  evicted  arbitrarily.  Practically,  then,  it  was  easy 
for  a  landlord  to  get  rid  of  any  tenant  he  might  wish  to, 
by  simply  raising  his  rent  to  a  point  the  tenant  could  not 


EDUCATIONAL  REFORM  477 

meet.      Nor  did  the  land  purchase  clauses  prove  effective. 
Only  seven  sales  were  made  up  to  1877. 

Nevertheless,  the  bill  was  very  important,  because  of  the  Its  prin- 
principles  upon  which  it  was  based.  One  principle  was  "^  ^^  ^"^' 
that  the  landlord's  ownership  of  the  soil  was  not  absolute 
and  unrestricted,  that  the  tenant  was  in  some  sense  a  partner 
in  the  land  he  tilled,  in  the  soil  of  Ireland.  Another 
was  the  desirability  of  enabling  the  tenant  to  become  com- 
plete owner.  The  land-purchase  section  of  the  act  proved 
ineffective,  largely  because  very  timidly  applied,  but  it  con- 
tained an  idea  that  was  to  grow  more  and  more  attractive 
and  to  be  applied  in  a  long  series  of  laws  destined  in  the  end 
to  be  highly  successful.  In  the  principles  on  which  it  was 
based,  the  Land  Act  of  1870  was  path-breaking. 

Another  measure  of  this  active  ministry  was  designed  to  Educational 
provide  a  national  system  of  elementary  education.  The  ^"O^"^ 
educational  system  of  England  was  deplorably  inadequate 
and  inefficient,  inferior  to  that  of  many  other  countries. 
England  possessed  the  famous  endowed  schools  of  Eton, 
Rugby,  Harrow,  but  these  and  others  were  for  the  aristo- 
cratic and  prosperous  middle  classes.  But  she  possessed 
no  national  system  of  public  schools  for  the  mass  of  the 
population.  It  was  long  the  accepted  opinion  in  England 
that  education  was  no  part  of  the  duty  of  the  State. 

The  work  that  the  State  neglected  was  discharged  in  a  Church 
measure,  by  the  various  religious  denominations.  Whatever  ^^  ^  ' 
education  the  children  of  the  working  class  received,  they  re- 
ceived in  schools  maintained  by  voluntary  gifts,  generally 
in  connection  with  a  church.  Most  of  the  schools  were 
Anglican,  some  were  Wesleyan,  some  Catholic,  some  Jewish. 
In  1833  Parliament  appropriated  the  sum  of  20,000  pounds 
in  aid  of  schools  established  by  voluntary  effort.  The  sum 
was  ludicrously  small.  Prussia  at  that  time  was  spending 
many  times  as  much  for  its  popular  education,  and  Prussia 
was  a  far  poorer  country  and  a  smaller  one.  Nevertheless, 
Parliament  tacitly   recognized  by  this   vote  that  the  State 


478       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


The  system 
inadequate. 


The 

question 
becomes 
urgent. 


The 
Forster 
Education 
Act  of 
1870. 


had  a  duty  to  perform  in  educating  its  citizens.  The  sum 
was  enhirged  to  30,000  pounds  in  1839.  Once  embarked 
upon  this  course,  there  could  be  no  turning  back.  The 
parliamentary  grant  grew  greatly,  and,  between  1860  and 
1865,  it  averaged  annually  not  far  from  700,000  pounds. 
With  this  encouragement  the  number  of  voluntary  schools 
increased,  but  was,  nevertheless,  totally  inadequate  to  the 
needs  of  the  nation.  It  came  to  be  generally  admitted  that 
this  system  would  not  suffice  for  the  education  of  the  people. 
In  1869  it  was  estimated  that  of  4,300,000  children  in 
need  of  education,  2,000,000  were  not  in  school  at  all, 
1,000,000  were  in  schools  that  received  no  grant  from  the 
government,  were  uninspected,  and  were  generally  of  a  very 
inferior  character,  and  only  1,300,000  were  in  schools  aided  by 
the  State  and  inspected  by  the  State.  Moreover,  whatever 
facilities  existed  were  unevenly  distributed;  many  districts 
being  entirely  without  schools. 

Many  forces  combined  now  to  make  the  question  of  popu- 
lar education  urgent.  When  the  working  classes  in  the 
boroughs  were  given  the  suffrage  in  1867,  the  cause  of  edu- 
cation received  a  great  stimulus.  "  We  must  educate  our 
masters,"  was  the  watchword.  Foreign  countries  were  cited 
as  examples.  The  northern  states,  which  had  conquered  the 
southern  in  the  American  Civil  War,  were  the  home  of  the 
common  school,  and  on  the  Continent  men  spoke  of  the 
victory  of  Prussia  over  Austria  at  Sadowa  as  the  triumph 
of  the  Prussian  schoolmaster,  meaning  that  the  Prussian 
army  was  the  more  intelligent.  Moreover,  the  trades-unions, 
representing  workingmen,  favored  popular  education. 

The  Gladstone  ministry  carried,  in  1870,  a  bill  designed 
to  provide  England  for  the  first  time  in  her  history  with  a 
really  national  system  of  elementary  education.  The  sys- 
tem then  established  remained  without  essential  change  until 
1902.  It  marked  a  great  progress  in  the  educational  facili- 
ties of  England.  The  bill  did  not  establish  an  entirely  new 
educational   machinery    to   be   paid   for   by  the    State    and 


THE  FORSTER  EDUCATION  BILL  479 

managed  by  the  State.     It  divided  the  country  into  schopi 
districts.     It  did  not   propose  to   establish  new  schools   in 
each  district  to  be  administered  by  the  State.     Its  aim  was 
not  to  provide  England  with  new  secular  schools,  but  to  pro- 
vide her  with  a  sufficient  number  of  schools  of  good  quality. 
It  incorporated  in   its   scheme  the   already   existing  church  Church 
schools.       "  Our    object,"    said    Mr.    Forster,    who    was    in  schools   in- 
charge  of  the  bill,  "  is  to  complete  the  voluntary  system,  and  j^  ^^^ 
to  fill  up  the  gaps."     Each  district  was  to  be  considered  system. 
by  itself.     If,  at  the  end  of  a  year,  it  was  found  to  possess 
already  a  sufficient  number  of  schools,  it  was  to  be  left  alone. 
Such   schools   must   submit  to   State   inspection,   and   would 
then  receive  parliamentary  aid.     If  the  district  were  found 
to  be  inadequately  supplied  with  schools  of  this  character, 
then  a  new  agency  was  to  be  created.     Local  school  boards 
were  to  be  elected  with  power  to  establish  new  schools,  and 
to  levy  local  taxes  for  the  purpose. 

Thus  there  would  be  two  sets  of  schools,  church  schools 
supported  by  voluntary  contributions,  by  grants  of  Parlia-  Board 

ment,  and  by  children's  tuition  fees,  and  "  board  schools,"     ^  ^,.  ,    , 
'  '^  ...  established, 

supported  by  grants  of  Parliament,  tuition  fees  and  local 

taxes. 

The  main  difficulty  encountered  by  educational  reformers 

in  1870,  as  had  been  the   case  before,   and   as   is   the  case 

to-day,   was    the    question    of    religious    instruction.     There  The 

was  a  party  among;  the  Liberals  who  wished  to  have  edu-  ^^^^  \.   . 

r       J  o  ^  ^  of   religious 

cation   entirely   secular,  but   this   party   was   in  the   minor-  instruction, 
ity.     The   supporters    of   the   voluntary   schools   wished   to 
have  those  schools  permitted  to  teach  the  tenets  of  the  de- 
nomination as  they  had  done  in  the  past.     There  was   in- 
serted in  this  bill  a  so-called  conscience  clause,  providing  that  The  ' 

where  voluntary  schools  included  as  a  part  of  their  teaching  , 

.   .  .       .  clause, 

instruction  in  the  religious  beliefs  of  the  denomination  con- 
ducting them,  parents  might  have  their  children  excused 
from  such  instruction.  To  facilitate  the  operation  of  this 
provision    all    religious    instruction    must    be    given    at    the 


480       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

beginning  or  at  tlie  close  of  the  school  session.  Thus  the 
children  of  Methodists  and  Baptists  could  attend  an  Anglican 
school  without  being  obliged  to  be  mstructed  in  the  Anglican 
beliefs. 

But  should  there  be  any  religious  instruction  in  the  new- 
board    schools,    schools    to   be   supported    in    part   by    local 
taxes.?     A   strong  party   demanded    that   these   schools    at 
least  be  entirely  secular,  but  Parliament  did  not  so  decide. 
The  The  bill  as  passed  provided  that  the  board  in  each  district 

Cowper-         should  decide  whether  there  should  be  relig-ious  instruction 
Temple  .  ,  f 

amendment.  °^'  "°^'  "^^  ^'^^^  "  ^^  permitted  such  instruction,  "  no 
catechism  or  religious  formulary  which  is  distinctive  of  any 
particular  denomination,"  should  be  taught.'  Li  other 
words  there  might  be  reading  of  the  Bible  and  comment  on 
it,  but  no  instruction  in  any  creed  or  dogma.  Moreover, 
in  board  schools,  as  in  voluntary,  there  should  be  a  conscience 
clause,  and  a  time  schedule  enabling  parents  to  have  their 
children  excused  from  such  exercises. 
Education  The  law  of  1870  did  not  establish  either  free,   or  com- 

nor  com-  '  P^^^^ry,  or  secular  education.  It  adopted,  under  the  restric- 
pulsory,  tions  indicated,  denominational  or  voluntary  schools,  and 
nor  secular,  allowed  them  to  give  denominational  teaching,  with,  however, 
a  conscience  clause  which  rendered  it  possible,  as  has  been 
said,  for  the  son  of  a  Methodist  to  attend  an  Episcopalian 
school.  It  permitted  undenominational  religious  teaching  in 
the  board  schools,  but  here,  too,  the  conscience  clause  was 
attached.  The  schools  were  not  free,  but  pupils  were 
to  pay  tuition.  It  was  held  undesirable  to  relieve  parents 
of  all  feeling  of  responsibility  for  the  education  of  their 
children.  School  boards  might,  however,  establish  free  pub- 
lic schools  in  districts  where  exceptional  poverty  prevailed 
or  might  pay  the  fees  of  poor  children. 

The  Education  Act  of  1870  was  a  compromise  between 
conflicting  views.     It  did  not  create  a  national  system  of 

*  The  Cowper-Temple  amendment,  which  also  provided  that  voluntary 
schools  should  receive  no  assistance   from  local  taxes. 


ARMY  REFORMS  481 

education  throughout  the  land.  It  kept  the  denominational 
sjTstem  and  added  another  system  to  it.  The  bill  was  more 
acceptable  to  the  opponents  of  the  Liberal  ministry,  mainly 
Churchmen,  than  to  its  supporters  and  Non-Conformists. 
John  Bright  thought  it  the  "  worst  act  passed  by  any  Liberal 
Parliament  since  1832."  Under  it,  however,  popular  edu- 
cation made  great  advances.  In  twenty  years  the  number 
of  schools  more  than  doubled,  and  were  capable  of  accommo- 
dating all  those  of  school  age.  In  1880  attendance  was 
made  compulsory,  and  in  1891  made  free. 

The  system  just  described  remained  in  force  till  1902,  when 
a  new  education  bill  was  passed. 

Another   reform   carried   through   by   this   ministry,   was  Army 
that  of  the   army,  by   the  introduction   of   a   short  service  reform, 
with  the  colors,  and  a  longer  term  in  the  reserve.     Here 
we  see,  as  we  do  everywhere  in  Europe,  the  tremendous  in- 
fluence of  the  Prussian  military  system,  which  had  proved 
so  victorious  in  the  campaign  culminating  at  Koniggratz.     It 
had  long  been  supposed  that  an  anny  of  veterans  was  the 
best.     But  Prussia  had  proved  the  contrary.     There  military 
service  was  compulsory  but  limited  to  a  few  years  in  the  active 
army.     Then  the  young  men  passed  into  the  reserve,  and 
might  be  called  out  if  necessary.     Military  service  was  their 
profession  for  only  a  brief  period.     The  Prussian  army  was 
consequently  an  army  of  young  men  in  the  prime  of  physical 
condition.     Prussia's    example   has    been    followed    since    in 
all  the  great  European  armies.     Universal  obligatory  service  Introduc- 
has  never  been  adopted  in  England,  but  the  period  of  active  *^°^  ^^ 
service  of  those  enlisting  was  reduced  by  Gladstone  so  that  ggj.yjgg 
the  army  became  one  of  young  men. 

But  no  real  refonn  in  the  army  could  be  accomplished 
without  an  additional  change  in  its  structure.  Men  ob- 
tained promotion  in  the  British  army  by  purchasing  posi- 
tions of  higher  rank.  There  was  a  definite  schedule  of 
prices  fixed  by  royal  ordinance.  To  be  an  ensign  in  the 
infantry  cost  450  pounds,  to  be  a  lieutenant-colonel  4,500 


482       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


Abolition 
of  the 
purchase 
system. 


Civil 

Service 

reform. 


pounds.  But  the  regulation  price  was  by  no  means  the 
actual  price.  So  eager  were  men  to  secure  these  positions 
that  they  offered  much  more.  Having  paid  for  his  position 
an  officer  considered  it  his  property,  to  be  sold  for  what 
he  could  get  for  it.  He  had  a  vested  interest.  Manifestly 
this  system  was  unfair  to  poor  men,  who  might  be  meritorious 
and  able  soldiers,  as  practically  the  desirable  positions  in 
the  army  were  open  only  to  the  wealthy  class.  Naturally 
the  growing  democratic  feeling  of  England,  expressed  in 
many  ways  by  this  ministry,  was  impatient  of  a  system 
which  rendered  the  army  an  appendage  of  the  aristocracy. 
Gladstone  brought  in  a  bill  to  abolish  purchase,  paying 
present  owners  at  the  market  price.  "  The  nation,"  said 
he,  "  must  buy  back  its  own  army  from  its  own  officers." 
Bitterly  opposed  by  the  officers  and  by  their  influential 
friends  inside  and  outside  Parliament,  the  ministry  suc- 
ceeded, however,  in  getting  its  bill  through  the  Commons 
only  to  have  it  practically  defeated  in  the  House  of  Lords. 
Mr.  Gladstone  then  took  a  step  for  which  he  was  severely 
criticised.  He  advised  the  Queen  to  abolish  purchase  by 
royal  ordinance,  which  could  be  done,  as  the  whole  system 
rested  on  royal  ordinance,  not  upon  an  act  of  Parliament. 
In  this  way  the  system  was  abolished  (1871),  and  promotion 
by  merit  substituted  for  promotion  by  purchase. 

In  the  same  session  in  which  the  military  career  was 
thrown  open  to  merit,  regardless  of  wealth  or  rank,  civil  and 
academic  careers  were  also  made  free  to  all  classes.  In 
18T0,  by  an  Order  in  Council,  the  system  of  appointment 
to  most  positions  in  the  Civil  Service  was  put  on  the  basis 
of  standing  in  open  competitive  examinations.  This  system 
had  earlier  been  applied  to  the  Indian  service.  The  step 
now  taken  was  strongly  opposed,  and  one  argument  was 
that  it  would  result  in  eliminating  the  aristocratic  class 
from  the  service  and  would  fill  all  positions  with  a  lower 
social  class.  Mr.  Gladstone  never  shared  this  opinion,  be- 
lieving, indeed,  that  the  better  educated  class  would  have 


INTRODUCTION  OF  THE  BALLOT  483 

all  the  stronger  hold  upon  the  higher  positions,  as  has  proved 

to  be  the  case,  the  greater  part  of  the  successful  candidates 

for  those  positions  being  Oxford  and  Cambridge  men. 

In  1871  the  universities  of  England  were  made  thoroughly  The  uni- 

national.     The  last  remaining  religious  tests,  which  operated  versities 

only   to   the   advantage   of  the   members   of  the   Church  of 

.  .    .        open. 

England,  were  abolished.     Henceforth  men  of  any  religious 

faith  or  no  religious  faith  could  have  all  the  advantages  of 
university  training  and  university  degrees.  This  was  another 
step  in  religious  and  intellectual  Hberty.  It  abolished  another 
monopoly  of  the  Established  Church.  The  universities  be- 
longed henceforth  to  all  Englishmen. 

Another  reform  carried  through  by  this  ministry  was  the  Introduc- 
Ballot  Act  of  1872.  Voting  up  to  this  time  had  been  tion  of  the 
viva  voce.  Each  voter  declared  his  candidate  in  public  at 
the  polling  place.  For  over  forty  years  the  question  of 
making  the  ballot  secret  had  been  discussed.  Indeed,  it 
was  considered  at  the  time  of  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832.  For 
years  Grote,  the  historian  of  Greece,  had  brought  the  matter 
up  annually  for  discussion  in  the  House  of  Commons.  The 
secret  ballot  was  one  of  the  demands  of  the  Chartists.  But 
the  movement  made  no  progress  as  the  years  went  by.  The 
argument  for  open  voting  was  that,  as  voting  is  a  trust, 
it  must  be  discharged  in  a  manner  known  of  all  men,  that 
thus  it  makes  for  courage  and  a  due  sense  of  responsibility. 
If  you  render  a  man's  vote  secret  you  undermine  the  citizen's 
courage,  you  foster  evasion.  This  was  Lord  Palmerston's 
view.  It  was  at  one  time  also  Gladstone's,  who  made  the 
ingenious  discovery  that  the  secret  ballot  had  led  to  the 
fall  of  the  Roman  Republic.  But  the  facts  were  apparent 
to  all  the  world  that  public  voting  led  to  extensive  bribery 
and  scandalous  corruption.  Intimidation,  also,  could  flourish  Reasons 
under  such  a  system,  and  now  that  the  poorer  people  were  ^^^  secret 
enfranchised  by  the  act  of  1867  they  plainly  needed  further 
protection  in  the  exercise  of  their  right.  As  Morley  says, 
"  Experience  showed  that  without  secrecy  in  its  exercise,  the 


484        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 


Gladstone's 

waning 

popularity. 


The  Irish 
University 
Bill. 


suffrage  was  not  free.  The  farmer  was  afraid  of  the 
landlord,  and  the  laborer  was  afraid  of  the  farmer;  the 
employer  could  tighten  the  screw  on  the  workman,  the 
shopkeeper  feared  the  power  of  his  best  customers,  the 
debtor  quailed  before  his  creditor,  the  priest  wielded  thunder- 
bolts over  the  faithful.  Not  only  was  the  open  vote  not 
free,  it  exposed  its  possessor  to  so  much  bullying,  molesta- 
tion, and  persecution  that  his  possession  came  to  be  less  of 
a  boon  than  a  nuisance."  ^ 

It  was  evident  that  whatever  the  abstract  arguments  might 
be,  the  concrete  ones  were  all  in  favor  of  the  secret  ballot. 
A  bill  was  finally  passed  in  1872  providing  for  the  Australian 
system  in  voting,  so  called  because  of  its  use  first  in  the  colony 
of  Victoria. 

Though  Mr.  Gladstone  was  losing  popularity  with  every 
new  reform,  alienating  in  each  case  those  affected  disad- 
vantageously  by  the  measure  in  question,  he  still  went  on. 
He  now  approached  the  question  of  the  third  branch  of  the 
Upas  tree,  the  system  of  Irish  education.  In  February 
1873  he  introduced  the  Irish  University  Bill,  designed  to 
give  adequate  facilities  to  Ireland  for  higher  education. 
That  the  facilities  were  not  adequate  was  clear.  There 
were  in  Ireland  two  universities,  that  of  Dublin,  which  con- 
sisted of  a  single  college,  Trinity,  a  Protestant  institution, 
though  admitting  Catholics  to  its  courses  and  degrees,  and 
Queen's  University,  established  in  1845,  and  consisting  of 
three  colleges,  at  Belfast,  Cork,  and  Galway.  These  were 
entirely  secular ;  the  Catholics  called  them  "  godless."  The 
Catholics,  constituting  the  mass  of  the  population,  desired 
a  university  of  their  own,  endowed  and  authorized  to  grant 
degrees.  There  had  been  established  some  years  before  a 
so-called  Catholic  University  of  Dublin,  but  it  was  not  em- 
powered to  grant  degrees.  Mr.  Gladstone  proposed  in  1873 
that  there  should  be  established  a  new  university  for  the 
whole  of  Ireland,  with  which  these  various  institutions  and 


Morley,  Gladstone,  II,  366. 


IRISH  UNIVERSITY  BILL  485 

others  should  be  affiliated.  The  new  university  was  to  be 
amply  endowed.  The  bill  made  shipwreck,  however,  on  the 
religious  difficulty.  It  was  provided  that  each  college  might  The 
be  denominational  and  teach  dogma  if  it  chose,  but  the  religious 
university  was  to  be  undenominational.  Owing  to  the  re- 
ligious passions  involved  it  was  held  that  the  university  course 
should  not  include  teaching  in  theology,  moral  philosophy, 
or  modern  history.  The  colleges  might  teach  these  subjects 
but  not  the  university.  There  was  added  the  remarkable 
provision  that  any  professor  might  be  suspended  or  removed 
from  his  position  if  he  wilfully  offended,  in  speaking  or 
writing,  the  religious  convictions  of  any  student. 

This  bill  satisfied  no  one.     Catholics  pronounced  against  General  dis- 
it,  saying  that  they  wanted  a  Catholic  university,  not   an  satisfaction 
undenominational  one.     Protestants,  on  the  other  hand,  felt  j^^j 
that   at   the   very   time   they   were   liberalizing  Oxford   and 
Cambridge  by  opening  them  to  all,  regardless   of  religious 
affiliations,  they  ought  not  to  encourage  bigotry   and  sec- 
tarianism in  an  Irish  university.     Moreover,  the  "  gagging  " 
clauses  were  bitterly  denounced.     A  university  which  should 
teach   neither   modern   history   nor   philosophy,    and   whose 
professors  should  not  have  freedom  of  speech  would  be   in  the 
eyes  of  reasonable  men  ridiculous  and  not  worth  establishing. 

The  opposition  was  very  general  and  violent.  Disraeli, 
feeling  that  the  moment  had  come  when  it  would  be  possible  to 
overthrow  the  ministry,  reviewed  the  whole  record  in  a 
caustic  speech,  denouncing  all  its  reforming  measures  as 
simply  "  harassing  legislation,"  endangering  all  the  institu- 
tions of  England,  To  which  John  Bright  retorted  that 
if  the  Conservatives  had  been  in  the  wilderness  they  would 
have  condemned  the  Ten  Commandments  as  "  harassing 
legislation."  The  bill  was  defeated,  and  Gladstone  resigned, 
but  as  the  Conservatives  would  not  take  office  at  that  moment 
he  came  back  into  power  for  a  few  months. 

Not  only  did  Gladstone's  domestic  legislation  give  offense 
to  many  interested  sections  of  the  population,  and  thus  raise 


486       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

Unpopular-    up  enemies,  but  his  foreign  policy  was  characterized  by  many 

ity  of  as   weak,   humihating    for   England,   lowering   her   prestige, 

.  particularly  his  adoption  of  arbitration  in  the  controversy 

foreign  .  . 

policy.  with  the  United  States  over  the  Alabama  matter. 

The  grievances  of  the  United  States  against  England  be- 
cause of  her  conduct  during  our  Civil  War  were  a  dangerous 
source  of  friction  between  the  two  countries  for  many  years, 
Mr.  Gladstone  agreed  to  submit  them  to  arbitration,  but  as 
The  the  decision  of  the  Geneva  Commission  was  against  England 

Alabama         (1872),  his  ministry  suffered  in  popularity.     Nevertheless, 

OTT7Q  I'/J 

Mr.  Gladstone  had  established  a  valuable  precedent.     This 

was  the  greatest  victory  yet  attained  for  the  principle  of 

settling  international  difficulties  by  arbitration  rather  than  by 

war.     In  this  sphere  also  this  ministry  advanced  the  interests 

of  humanity,   though  it  drew  only  disadvantage  for   itself 

from  its  service. 

The  All  the  accumulated  disaffection  of  six  years  found  vent 

elections  of  i^  the  elections  of  1874.     The  Liberals  were  defeated  by  a 
1874  .      . 

majority    of   fifty.     The    Conservatives    entered    office   with 

Disraeli  as  prime  minister  and  remained  in  power  till  1880. 
Thus  fell  Gladstone's  first  and  most  successful  adminis- 
tration, with  a  record  of  remarkable  achievement  in  legisla- 
tion and  in  administrative  reform. 
The  Disraeli  Mr.  Disraeli  now  found  himself  prime  minister,  chief  of 
ministry.  ^  party  controlling  by  safe  majorities  both  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment. His  administration  lasted  from  1874  to  1880.  It 
differed  as  strikingly  from  Gladstone's  as  his  character 
diflTered  from  that  of  his  predecessor.  This  was  owing  to 
several  facts.  The  criticisms  which  his  party  had  leveled  at 
its  opponents,  of  disturbing  everything  by  harassing  legisla- 
tion, imposed  upon  him  the  obligation  of  leaving  tilings  alone, 
of  inactivity  in  domestic  legislation  where  possible,  of  effect- 
ing only  mild  reforms  where  reforms  were  necessary  at  all. 
Colonial  and  foreign  affairs  were  the  chief  occupation  of 
this  ministry.  Disraeli  found  the  situation  favorable  and 
the  moment   opportune   for   impressing   upon   England   the 


DISRAELI  AND  IMPERIALISM  487 

political  ideal,  long  germinating  in  his  mind,  succinctly 
called  imperialism,  that  is  the  transcendant  importance  of  Imperial- 
breadth  of  view  and  vigor  of  assertion  of  England's  position  ^^™" 
as  a  world  power,  as  an  empire,  not  as  an  insular  state.  In 
1872  he  had  said:  "In  my  judgment  no  minister  in  this 
country  will  do  his  duty  who  neglects  any  opportunity  of 
reconstructing  as  much  as  possible  our  colonial  empire, 
and  of  responding  to  those  distant  sympathies  which  may 
become  the  source  of  incalculable  strength  and  happiness  to 
this  land."  This  principle  Disraeli  emphasized  in  act  and 
speech  during  his  six  years  of  power.  It  was  imperfectly 
realized  under  him ;  it  was  partially  reconsidered  and  revised 
by  Gladstone  upon  his  return  to  power  in  1880.  But  it  had 
definitely  received  lodgment  in  the  mind  of  England  before 
he  left  power.     It  gave  a  new  note  to  English  politics.     This  Importance 

is   Disraeli's   historic   sie-nificance   in   the   annals   of  British  °        ® 

.  .  .  .  .  colonies 

politics.     He  greatly  stimulated  niterest  in  the  British  col-  emphasized. 

onies.  He  invoked  "  the  sublime  instinct  of  an  ancient  people." 
The  first  two  years  of  his  administration  were  singularly 
uneventful.  The  work  of  the  preceding  six  years  was  ac- 
cepted and  left  in  the  main  untouched.  Laws  were  passed 
in  the  direction  of  economic  improvement,  to  enable  certain 
large  towns  to  provide  laborers  with  better  dwellings,  if 
they  should  wish  to,  to  improve  certain  Friendly  Societies 
so  that  the  savings  of  the  poor  would  be  more  secure,  to  pro- 
vide a  system  of  land  registration,  so  that  land  titles  might  be 
more  certain. 

Disraeli  had  said  that  if  Gladstone  had  been  less  eager  to 
reform  everything  in  England  and  more  insistent  upon  main- 
taining her  prestige  abroad,  it  would  have  been  better.  He 
criticised  the  party  as  secretly  undermining  the  Empire,  as 
believing  the  Empire  a  burden,  as  looking  upon  the  colonies 
simply  in  a  financial  light  as  a  great  and  dubious  expense. 
In  opposition  he  spoke  of  the  "  cause  of  the  Tory  party  " 
as  the  "  cause  of  the  British  Empire,"  and  he  declared  the 
"  issue  is  not  a  mean  one." 


488       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

Now  in  power  himself  he  set   about  reversing  what  he 
considered  to  have  been  the  unimaginative,  unpatriotic  pol- 
icy of  his  predecessors.     His  first  conspicuous  achievement 
Purchase   of  in  foreign  affairs  was  the  purchase  of  the  Suez  canal  shares. 
the  Suez       r^j-^g  Suez  canal  had  been  built  by  the  French  against  ill- 
-hares  concealed  English  opposition.     Disraeli  had  himself  declared 

that  the  undertaking  would  inevitably  be  a  failure.  Now 
that  the  canal  was  built  its  success  was  speedily  apparent. 
It  radically  changed  the  conditions  of  commerce  with  the 
East.  It  shortened  greatly  the  distance  to  the  Orient  by 
water.  Hitherto  a  considerable  part  of  the  commerce  with 
India,  China,  and  Australia  had  been  carried  on  by  the  long 
voyage  around  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope.  Some  went  by  the 
Red  Sea  route,  but  that  involved  transhipment  at  Alexandria. 
Now  it  could  all  pass  through  the  canal.  About  threer 
fourths  of  the  tonnage  passing  through  the  canal  was  Eng- 
lish. It  was  the  direct  road  to  India.  There  were  some 
400,000  shares  in  the  Canal  Company.  The  Khedive  of 
Egypt  held  a  large  block  of  these,  and  the  Khedive  was 
nearly  bankrupt.  Disraeli  bought,  in  1875,  his  177,000 
shares  by  telegraph  for  four  million  pounds,  and  the  fact 
was  announced  to  a  people  who  had  never  dreamed  of  it, 
but  who  applauded  what  seemed  a  brilliant  stroke,  somehow 
checkmating  the  French.  It  was  said  that  the  high  road 
to  India  was  now  secure.  Financially  it  was  an  advan- 
tageous bargain.  The  shares  are  now  worth  more  than  seven 
times  what  was  paid  for  them.^  The  political  significance  of 
this  act  was  that  it  determined  at  least  in  principle  the  future 
of  the  relations  of  England  to  Egypt,  and  that  it  seemed 
to  strike  the  note  of  imperial  self-assertion  which  was  Dis- 
raeli's chief  ambition,  and  which  was  the  most  notable  char- 
acteristic of  his   administration. 

At  the  same  time  Disraeli  resolved  to  emphasize  the  im- 

^  The  exact  number  of  shares  acquired  was  176,603;  amount  paid 
3,976,582  pounds.  England,  therefore,  paid  about  $112  per  share  (par 
value  $100).    The  stock  was  quoted  in  1909  at  $790. 


THE  IMPERIAL  TITLE  489 

portance   of  India,   England's   leading   colony,   in    another 

way.      He  proposed  a  new  and  sounding  title  for  the  British 

sovereign.     She  was  to  be  Empress  of  India.     The  Opposi-  The  Queen 

tion  denounced  this   as  "  cheap  "   and  "  tawdry,"   a  vulgar  proclaimed 

1         •  1        /•  T^-  r\  Empress  of 

piece  of  pretension.     Was  not  the  title  or  King  or  Queen  j^^^g^^ 

borne  by  the  sovereigns  of  England  for  a  thousand  years 
glorious  enough.?  But  Disraeli  urged  it  as  showing  "the 
unanimous  determination  of  the  people  of  the  country  to 
retain  our  connection  with  the  Indian  Empire.  And  it 
will  be  an  answer  to  those  mere  economists  and  those  diplo- 
matists who  announce  that  India  is  to  us  only  a  burden 
or  a  danger.  By  passing  this  bill  then,  the  House  will 
show,  in  a  manner  that  is  unmistakable,  that  they  look 
upon  India  as  one  of  the  most  precious  possessions  of  the 
Crown,  and  their  pride  that  it  is  a  part  of  her  empire  and 
governed  by  her  imperial  throne." 

The  reasoning  was  weak,  but  the  proposal  gave  immense 
satisfaction  to  the  Queen,  and  it  was  enacted  into  law.  On 
January  1,  1877,  the  Queen's  assumption  of  the  new  title 
was  officially  announced  in  India  before  an  assembly  of  the 
ruling  princes. 

In  Europe  Disraeli  insisted  upon  carrying  out  a  spirited 
foreign  policy.      His  opportunity  came  with  the  reopening  Reopening 
of  the  Eastern  Question,   or  the  question   of  the  integrity  of  the 
of  Turkey,  in  1876.      For  two  years  this  problem  absorbed  ^^^^3^^^^^ 
the  interest   and  attention  of  rulers  and  diplomatists,   and 
England  had  much  to  do  with  the  outcome.      This  subject 
may,    however,    be   better    studied    in    connection    with    the 
general  history  of  the  Eastern  problem  in  the  nineteenth 
century.^ 

Disraeli,  who  in  1876  became  Lord  Beaconsfield,  continued 
in  power  until  1880.  The  emphasis  he  put  upon  imperial 
and  colonial  problems  was  to  exert  a  considerable  influence 
upon  the  rising  generation,  and  upon  the  later  history  of 
England.       But    it   involved   him   in    several    undertakings, 

^  See  Chapter  XXVIII. 


490        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

particularly  wars  in  Afghanistan  and  South  Africa,  which 
did  not  prove  successful,  and  which  contributed  to  his  over- 
Fall  of  the  throw    and   the   temporary    eclipse    of   his    party.       In   the 
Disraeli  elections  of  1880  the  Liberals  attacked  the  whole  policy  of  the 

last  six  years  with  vehemence.  The  result  of  the  elections 
was  the  return  of  a  Liberal  majority  of  over  a  hundred. 
In  April  1880,  Mr.  Gladstone  became  prime  minister  for  the 
second  time. 
The  Second  Mr.  Gladstone's  greatest  ability  lay  in  internal  reform, 
Gladstone       j^g   his   previous   ministry   had   shown.       This  was   the   field 

■■oo«  -looL       of  his  inclination,  and,  as  he  thought,  of  the  national  wel- 
1880-1885.  '  '  &     ' 

fare.  Peace,  retrenchment,  and  reform,  the  watchwords  of 
his  party,  now  represented  the  programme  he  wished  to  fol- 
low. But  this  was  not  to  be.  While  certain  great  measures 
of  internal  improvement  were  passed  during  the  next  five 
years,  those  years  on  the  whole  were  characterized  by  the  dom- 
inance of  imperial  and  colonial  questions,  with  attendant  wars. 
Mr.  Gladstone  was  forced  to  busy  himself  "with  foreign  policy 
far  more  than  in  his  preceding  administration.  Serious 
questions  confronted  him  in  Asia  and  Africa.  These  may 
best  be  studied,  however,  in  the  chapter  on  the  British 
Empire.^ 

Two   pieces   of  internal  legislation   of  great   importance 
enacted   during   this    ministry    merit    description,   the    Irish 
Land  Act  of  1881,  and  the  Reform  Bills  of  1884-5. 
Failure  of  The  legislation  of  his  preceding  ministry  had  not  pacified 

land  Act  of  Ireland.       Indeed,   the   Land   Act   of  1870   had   proved   no 

1870. 

final  settlement,  but  a  great  disappointment.  It  had  estab- 
lished the  principle  that  the  landlord's  ownership  in  Ireland 
was  not  absolute  and  unrestricted  but  was  a  kind  of 
limited  partnership.  The  tenant  was  to  be  compensated 
if  deprived  of  his  farm  except  for  non-payment  of  rent, 
and  was  to  be  compensated,  in  any  case,  for  all  the  permanent 
improvements  which  he  had  made  upon  the  land.  But  this  was 
not  sufficient  to  give  the  tenant  any  security  in  his  holding.    It 

*  Chapter  XXII. 


THE  LAND  ACT  OF  1881  491 

did  not  prevent  the  raising  of  the  rent  at  the  will  of  the 
landlord.  The  bill  was  not  far-reaching  enough  adequately 
to  safeguard  the  interests  of  the  tenant;  moreover,  it  con- 
tained too  many  exceptions  and  restrictions.  The  bill,  in 
fact,  proved  no  solution,  but  only  the  first  of  a  long  line 
of  measures  enacted  since,  aiming  at  the  removal  of  the 
agrarian  difficulties    under  which  the  island  suffered. 

In  his  new  measure  Gladstone  sought  to  give  the  peasant,  The  land 
in  addition  to  the  compensation  for  improvement  previously  ^'^^  °^ 
secured,  a  fair  rent,  a  fixed  rent,  one  that  is  not  constantly 
subject  to  change  at  the  will  of  the  landlord,  and  freedom 
of  sale,  that  is,  the  liberty  of  the  peasant  to  sell  his  holding 
to  some  other  peasant.  These  were  the  "  three  F's,"  which 
had  once  represented  the  demands  of  advanced  Irishmen, 
though  they  no  longer  did.  Henceforth,  the  rent  of  an 
Irish  farm  was  not  to  be  fixed  by  the  ordinary  law  of  supply 
and  demand,  by  an  agreement  between  landlord  and  tenant, 
but  was  to  be  determined  by  a  court,  established  for  the 
purpose.  It  was  hardly  proper  to  call  this  "  fair  "  rent. 
It  might  not  necessarily  be  fair,  as  the  Land  Court  might 
lean  too  much  in  favor  of  the  landlord,  or  in  favor  of  the 
peasant.       It  was,  however,  a  judicial  rent.       Rents,   once  Rents  to  be 

judicially  determined,  were  to   be   unchangeable   for   fifteen  Judicially 

■,.  1-1*  1  •   ^  1  •!  determined, 

years,  during  which  time  the  tenant  might  not  be  evicted 

except  for  breaches   of  covenant,   such  as   non-payment   of 

rent.      There  was  also  attached  to  the  bill  a  provision  similar 

to  the  one  in  the  preceding  measure  of  1870,  looking  toward 

the  creation  of  a  peasant  proprietorship.      The  Government 

was  to  loan  money  to  the  peasants  under  certain  conditions 

and  on  easy  terms,  to  enable  them  to  buy  out  the  landlords, 

thus  becoming  complete  owners  themselves. 

The   bill   was    attacked  with   unusual  bitterness.       Land-  Denounced 

owners,  believing  that  it  meant  a  reduction  of  rents,  deter- 

mined  not  by  themselves  but  by  a  court,  called  it  confisca-  property. 

tion  of  property.     "  It  is  a  bill,"  said  the  Duke  of  Argyll, 

"  by  which  three  persons  are  authorized  to  settle  the  value 


492       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

of  the  whole  country."  It  was  attacked  because  it  estab- 
lished the  principle  that  rents  were  not  to  be  determined, 
like  the  price  of  other  things,  by  the  law  of  supply  and 
demand.  Rents  were  not  to  be  what  the  landlord  might  de- 
mand and  the  peasant  agree  to  pay,  but  were  to  be  reasonable, 
and  their  reasonableness  was  to  be  decided  by  outsiders, 
judges,  having  no  direct  interest  at  all,  that  is,  in  last  resort? 
by  the  State.  The  bill  was  criticized  as  altering  ruthlessly 
the  nature  of  property  in  land,  as  establishing  dual  owner- 
ship. The  only  alternative,  however,  was  the  single  owner- 
ship of  the  landlord,  that  is,  his  right  to  do  as  he  liked 
with  the  land,  the  very  thing  which  had,  it  was  asserted, 
occasioned  the  many  sufferings  of  Ireland,  and  the  endless 
series  of  coercion  acts  by  which  it  had  been  so  long  ruled 
arbitrarily.  The  bill  passed.  It  did  not  pacify  Ireland, 
which  was  now  putting  forth  new  demands  of  a  political 
nature  and  was  in  the  full  swing  of  the  Home  Rule  move- 
ment. It  did  not  bring  immediate  but  only  ultimate  im- 
provement. Meanwhile  disturbances,  and  even  atrocious 
crimes,  continued,  evidences  of  the  profound  unrest  of  the 
unhappy  island. 

It  was  Mr.  Gladstone  who  carried  through  the  third  great 
reform   act   of   the   nineteenth   century,   by   which   England 
has  been  transformed  from  an  oligarchy  into  a  democracy. 
The  The   Reform   Bill   of   1832   had  given   the   suffrage   to   the 

Bill  of  wealthier  members  of  the  middle  class.      The  Reform  Bill  of 

1884.  1867  had  taken  a  long  step  in  the  direction  of  democracy 

by  giving  the  vote  practicall}'^  to  all  householders  in  bor- 
oughs. But  those  who  lived,  not  in  boroughs,  but  in  the 
country,  were  not  greatly  profited  by  this  measure.  In 
England  there  are  three  classes  of  people  who  have  to  do 
with  the  land.  First,  the  landlords,  the  owners  of  large 
estates.  These  men  belonged  to  the  nobility  and  gentry, 
and  had  controlled  the  House  of  Commons  before  1832, 
when  that  house  was  called  the  landlords'  Parliament.  Sec- 
ond are  the  farmers,  men  who  rent  their  farms  from  the  land- 


REFORM  BILL  OF  1884  493 

lords,  and  who  conduct  the  agriculture  of  the  country,  but  do 
not,  as  a  rule,  do  the  actual  work  of  tilling  the  soil.  These 
men  were  largely  enfranchised  by  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832. 
Third,  there  are  the  laborers,  employed  by  the  farmer  to 
do  his  work,  day  laborers.  Now  the  Act  of  1867  did  not 
give  them  the  suffrage,  though  it  did  give  it  largely  to 
the  day  laborers  in  the  boroughs  by  establishing  the  house- 
hold and  lodger  franchise,  a  franchise  so  low  that  many 
workingmen  could  meet  it.  The  franchise  in  boroughs 
was  much  wider  than  the  franchise  in  counties.  There  was 
apparently  no  valid  reason  for  giving  a  vote  to  workingmen 
living  in  boroughs  and  not  to  those  living  in  country  villages 
or  on  farms.  Mr.  Gladstone's  bill  of  1884  aimed  at  the  The  county 
abolition  of  this  inequality  between  the  two  classes  of  con-  franchise 
stituencies,  by  extending  the  borough  franchise  to  the 
counties  so  that  the  mass  of  workingmen  would  have  the 
right  to  vote  whether  they  lived  in  town  or  country.  The 
county  franchise,  previously  higher,  was  to  be  exactly 
assimilated  to  the  borough  franchise.  The  bill  passed,  and 
in  connection  with  bills  enacted  for  Scotland  and  Ireland, 
doubled  the  number  of  county  voters,  and  increased  the 
total  number  of  the  electorate  from  over  three  to  over  five 
millions.  Mr.  Gladstone's  chief  argument  was  that  the  bill 
would  lay  the  foundations  of  the  government  broad  and 
deep  in  the  people's  will,  and  "  array  the  people  in  one 
solid  compacted  mass  around  the  ancient  throne  which  it 
has  loved  so  well,  and  around  a  constitution  now  to  be 
more  than  ever  powerful,  and  more  than  ever  free." 

The  franchise  bill  of  1884  was  accompanied,  as  had  been 
those  of  1832  and  1867,  by  a  redistribution  of  seats  in  Redistribu- 
the  House  of  Commons.  By  the  Redistribution  Act  of  *^°^  °^ 
1885  inequalities  of  representation  of  the  same  type  as 
those  rendered  familiar  in  connection  with  the  Reform  Bill 
of  1832,  inequalities  which  had  grown  up  in  the  last  genera- 
tion, were  redressed,  and  certain  new  principles  were  adopted. 
Towns   containing   fewer  than   15,000   inhabitants   were   to 


494       UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

lose  their  separate  representation  and  be  merged  in  the 
counties  in  which  they  were  situated.  Towns  whose  popula- 
tion ranged  between  15,000  and  50,000  were  to  return  one 
member  only.  Such  were  the  two  disfranchising  clauses. 
There  were  some  exceptions,  but  the  result  of  the  whole 
was  the  extinction  of  160  seats.  These  were  distributed 
among  the  more  populous  boroughs  and  counties. 

The  Act  of  1885  provided  that  henceforth  boroughs  with 
more  than  15,000,  and  less  than  50,000  inhabitants,  should 
have  one  member;  those  with  more  than  50,000  and  less 
than  165,000,  two  members;  those  with  more  than  165,000, 
three,  with  an  additional  member  for  every  50,000  inhab- 
itants above  that  number.  Thus  London,  in  place  of  the 
previous  22  members,  was  to  have  62,  to  which  it  was  en- 
titled if  population  was  to  be  the  basis.  Liverpool  was 
to  have  nine,  Glasgow  seven,  and  so  on.  The  same  was 
to  hold  with  the  counties.  Yorkshire  was  to  have  26  mem- 
bers, Lancashire  23.  The  result  was  that  the  great  in- 
dustrial centers,  towns  and  counties,  received  representation 
approximate  to  their  importance. 

The  Redistribution  Act  of  1885  further  applied  in  most 
Single  cases  the  principle  of  single  member  divisions.      Previously, 

if  a  borough  had  had  two  members  it  yet  formed  one  con- 
stituency. All  the  voters  had  the  right  to  vote  for  two 
members.  Such  boroughs  were  now  divided  into  as  many 
constituencies  as  they  were  allowed  members.  While  pre- 
viously some  counties  had  been  divided  as  being  incon- 
veniently large,  no  boroughs  had  been.  The  Act  of  1885 
applied  the  new  principle  to  towns  and  counties  alike,  each 
constituency  returning,  with  few  exceptions,  only  one  mem- 
ber. For  instance,  Liverpool,  which  had  previously  sent 
three  members  to  Parliament,  and  which  now  was  to  send 
nine,  was  divided  into  nine  distinct  constituencies,  each  re- 
turning one  member ;  Lancashire  was  now  split  into  twenty- 
three  divisions,  with  a  single  member  from  each. 

The  membership  of  the  House  of  Commons  was  increased 


member 
districts 


PRESENT  STATE  OF  THE  SUFFRAGE   495 

at  this  time  to  670,  where  it  still  remains.  The  number  in 
1815  was  658.  This  was  not  changed  in  1832,  nor  in  1867, 
but  after  1867  it  had  been  reduced  to  652  by  the  disfrancliise- 
ment  of  several  boroughs  for  corrupt  practices. 

Since  1885  there  has  been  no  new  redistribution  of  seats, 
and  the  equality  of  districts,  roughly  worked  out  in  1885, 
has  since  disappeared  in  many  cases.  There  is  no 
periodical  readjustment  according  to  population,  as 
in  the  United  States  after  each  census.  To-day  some  elec- 
toral districts  are  ten,  or  even  fifteen,  times  as  large  as 
others;  many  are  two  or  three.  Constituencies  range  from 
about  13,000  to  over  217,000. 

Since  1885  also  there  has  been  no  extension  of  the  suffrage. 
The  evolution  of  the  parliamentary  franchise,  which  we  have 
traced  through  the  three  great  measures  of  1832,  1867,  and 
1884,  has  progressed  no  further.  It  should  not  be  forgotten 
that  there  is  no  single,  uniform,  universal  qualification  for  Various 
voting;.     A  man  gets  the  right  to  vote  by  being  able  to  meet  Qualifica- 

n  ^  ^•n  ■  ^    ,  1  1  r  t^O^S    for 

one  of  several  qualifications,  and  he  may  have  several  votes,  ^Q^jj^g. 
if  he  satisfies  the  qualifications  in  different  constituencies 
(plural  voting).  He  may  vote  if  he  owns  land  of  forty 
shillings  annual  value,  if  he  holds  land  of  the  value  of  five 
pounds  by  a  lease  of  sixty  years,  of  fifty  pounds  by  a  lease  of 
twenty  years,  if  he  is  a  householder,  no  matter  what  the  value 
of  the  house  is,  if  he  is  an  "  occupier  "  of  a  house  or  building 
or  store,  of  the  annual  value  of  ten  pounds,  if  he  is  a  lodger 
of  lodgings  of  the  annual  value,  unfurnished,  of  ten  pounds. 
Some  enjoy  the  right  under  the  provisions  of  the  Act  of  1884, 
some  under  those  of  the  Act  of  1867,  some  even  under  those  of 
the  Act  of  1832.  "  The  present  condition  of  the  franchise 
is  indeed,"  says  President  Lowell,  "  historical  rather  than 
rational.  It  is  complicated,  uncertain,  expensive  in  the 
machinery  required,  and  excludes  a  certain  number  of  people 
whom  there  is  no  reason  for  excluding,  while  it  admits  many 
people  who  ought  not  to  be  admitted,  if  any  one  is  to  be 
debarred.      But  the  hardship  or  injustice  affects  individuals 


496        UNDER  GLADSTONE  AND  DISRAELI 

alone.  No  considerable  class  in  the  community  is  aggrieved, 
and  neither  political  party  is  now  anxious  to  extend  the 
franchise.  The  Conservatives  are  not  by  tradition  in  favor 
of  such  a  course,  and  leading  Liberals  have  come  to  realize 
that  any  further  extension  would  be  likely  to  benefit  their 
opponents."  ' 

'  Lowell,  The  Government  of  England,  I,  213-14. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 

The  Gladstone  ministry  fell  from  power  in  1885  chiefly 

because  of  the  unpopularity  of  its  Egyptian  policy,  which 

will   be   described   elsewhere.       Lord   Salisbury,   since   Lord 

Beaconsfield's  death  in  1881  leader  of  the  Conservative  party, 

formed   a   ministry.       This   lasted   but    a    few   months,    for  The  First 

the  fi-eneral  elections  at  the  close  of  the  year  showed  that    ^    .  .  J 
*=»  ^  administra- 

the  Liberals  would  have  in  the  new  Parliament  335  votes,  tJQn^ 

the  Conservatives  249,  and  the  Irish  Home  Rulers  86.     Thus 

the  Liberals  exactly  equaled  the  other  two  parties  combined. 

The  Irish  held  the  balance  of  power.       It  is  necessary  at 

this   point  to  trace  the  history   of   this   new  party,   which 

was  destined  to  exert  a  profound  influence  upon  the  course 

of  British  politics. 

During   Gladstone's    first   ministry   there   was    formed   in  The  Home 

Dublin  the  Home  Government  Association  of  Ireland,  three 

.  Movement, 

years   later   reconstituted   as   the  Home   Rule   League,   and 

demanding  an  Irish  Parliament  for  the  management  of  the 
internal  aff"airs  of  Ireland.  The  Irish  had  constantly 
smarted  under  the  injury  which  they  felt  had  been  done  them 
by  the  abolition  of  their  former  Parliament,  which  sat  in 
Dublin,  and  which  was  abolished  by  the  Act  of  Union  of 
1800.  The  feeling  for  nationality,  one  of  the  dominant 
forces  of  the  nineteenth  century  everywhere,  acted  upon 
them  with  unusual  force.  They  disliked,  for  historical  and 
sentimental  reasons,  the  rule  of  an  English  Parliament,  and 
the  sense  as  well  as  reality  of  subjection  to  an  alien  people. 
They  felt  that  England  must  give  them  rights  of  self- 
government  or  else  must  rule  them  by  coercion.  The  party 
grew  into  importance  under  Disraeli's  administration,  hav- 

497 


498  ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 

ing  51  members  in  Parliament,  who  supported  the  principle 
of  Home  Rule.  Their  leader  at  first  was  Mr.  Butt,  who 
brought  their  demands  before  the  House  of  Commons.  The 
party  did  not  wish  the  separation  of  Ireland  from  England, 
but  a  separate  parliament  for  Irish  affairs,  on  the  ground 
that  the  Parliament  at  Westminster  had  neither  the  time 
nor  the  understanding  necessary  for  the  proper  considera- 
tion of  measures  affecting  the  Irish.  It  became  much  more 
Charles  aggressive  when   Charles   Stuart  Parnell  became  its  leader 

Stuart  -jj  1879.      Parnell  was  a  Protestant,  of  English  education, 

Parnell.  .  . 

a  landowner.  Unlike  the  other  great  leaders  of  Irish  his- 
tory— Grattan,  O'Connell — he  was  no  orator,  and  was  of 
a  cold  and  haughty  nature,  but  of  an  inflexible  will.  For 
twelve  years  he  pla3^ed  a  great  part  in  the  politics  of  Eng- 
land and  Ireland. 

Discontented  with  the  slow,  easy,  ineffective  methods   of 
urging  Home  Rule  hitherto  followed,  Paraell  persuaded  the 
Adoption   of  party  to  adopt  a  more  vigorous  and  defiant  attitude.     His 
the  po  icy      policy  was  to  keep  the  Home  Rule  party  entirely  separate 
tion,  from  the  other  parties,  and  to  use  the  modes  of  procedure 

of  the  House  of  Comm>ons  in  order  to  block  the  work  of 
the  House;  in  other  words,  to  resort  to  endless  dilatory 
motions  and  roll-calls  and  speeches,  in  short,  obstruction. 
The  rules  of  the  House  rendered  this  possible,  as  every  mem- 
ber could  propose  as  many  amendments  as  he  chose  to  any 
bill,  and  could  speak  on  those  proposals  as  long  as  he  chose. 
The  policy  was  carried  out  by  the  Irish  members  relieving 
each  other  systematically.  In  1879  it  was  estimated  that 
Paniell  had  spoken  five  hundred  times,  and  that  two  others 
had  spoken  over  three  hundred  times  each.  The  purpose 
of  this  recourse  to  such  methods  was  to  paralyze  the  action 
of  Parliament  until  it  gave  heed  to  Irish  demands,  to  pre- 
vent or  delay  all  legislation  on  even  the  most,  necessary 
subjects  until  their  grievances  were  redressed,  and  to  show 
conclusively  that  one  Parliament  was  insufficient  for  the 
business  of  both  countries.    The  House  was  obliged  to  change 


THE  HOME  RULE  PARTY  499 

its  rules  in  order  to  prevent  this  blocking  of  public  business 

by  a  small  fraction  of  its  members. 

In  the  Parliament  of   1880  the  Home  Rulers  numbered  Gladstone 

63.       Mr.    Gladstone,    still    believing    that    land    legislation 

,  ,  pacify 

would  solve  the  Irish  question,  showed  the  intention  of  carry-  Ireland, 
ing  further  the  policy  begun  in  his  first  administration.  He 
caused  the  Land  Act  of  1881  to  be  passed.  But  the  Home 
Rulers  all  through  his  term  pursued  him  even  more  vehe- 
mently than  they  had  his  predecessors.  They  accepted  the 
bill  as  a  mere  instalment.  But  the  first  three  years  of 
Gladstone's  second  administration  were  years  of  unexampled 
bitterness.  The  Irish  resorted  to  every  means  to  get  their 
object,  intimidation,  violence,  mutilation  of  cattle,  burning 
of  houses,  even  the  murder  of  landlords  and  some  of  the 
Government  officials  in  Ireland,  notably  Lord  Frederick 
Cavendish  and  Thomas  Burke,  shockingly  assassinated  in 
broad  daylight  in  Phoenix  Park,  Dublin,  in  1882.  Gladstone 
replied  by  a  policy  of  coercion.  Conciliatory  legislation 
and  stern  repression  of  violence  were  his  principles  of  action. 
After  1883  the  condition  of  Ireland  became  somewhat  calmer, 
but  only  after  a  confused  and  bitter  struggle,  which  had 
aroused  all  the  hostile  feelings  of  both  the  Irish  and  the 
English.  The  Irish,  it  was  clear,  were  prepared  to  fight 
to  the  knife,  were  biding  the  time  when  they  might  force 
Home  Rule  from  Parliament  by  holding  the  balance  of 
power  in  the  House  of  Commons.  In  the  next  Parliament, 
which  met  in  1886,  they  were  in  this  position.  They  had  86 
members,  all  but  one  of  whom  represented  Irish  constituencies. 

Mr.  Gladstone  entered  upon  his  third  ministry  February  The  Third 
1,  1886.       It  lasted  less  than  six  months,  and  was  wholly  Gladstone 
devoted  to  the  question  of  Ireland. 

It  was  evident  that  the  Irish  question  would  dominate 
Mr.  Gladstone's  third  ministry,  as  it  had  dominated  his 
first  and  largely  his  second.  This  would  have  been  so 
even  if  the  Home  Rulers  had  not  held  the  balance  of 
power  in  the  House  of  Commons.     It  would  have  dominated 


500 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


The  Home 
Rulers 
hold  the 
balance  of 
power 


Home    Eule 
or  Coercion? 


Introduc- 
tion  of  the 
Home  Rule 
Bill. 


the  Conservatives  had  not  the  Liberals  won  in  the  general 
election.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  expressed  during  the  cam- 
paign his  desire  that  either  one  or  the  other  of  the  two 
great  English  parties  should  have  so  large  a  majority  that 
the  vexatious  question  could  be  handled  without  the  aid 
of  Irish  votes.  There  is,  indeed,  evidence  to  show  that  he 
was  quite  willing  that  the  Conservatives  should  solve  this 
question  if  they  would  only  honestly  face  it.  He  wished 
to  raise  it  out  of  the  realm  of  party  conflict.  That  was 
not  to  be,  however,  and  the  election  had  resulted  in  creating 
just  the  situation  he  had  dreaded  and  deplored.  The  Irish 
held  the  balance  of  power,  and  any  proposals  he  might 
make  would  now  be  represented  as  simply  a  bribe  for  political 
position.  Such  a  consideration,  however,  he  proudly  ignored, 
and  it  had  no  hold  upon  serious  politicians  of  either  party, 
for  his  noble  record  for  fifty  years  gave  it  emphatic  denial. 
This  was  the  situation  as  it  presented  itself  to  his  mind. 
The  Irish  people  had  expressed  their  almost  unanimous  wish 
by  returning  a  solid  body  of  85  Home  Rulers  out  of  the 
103  members  to  whom  they  were  entitled.  Mr.  Gladstone 
had  tried  in  previous  legislation  to  rule  the  Irish  according 
to  Irish  rather  than  English  ideas,  where  he  considered  those 
ideas  just.  He  believed  the  great  blot  upon  the  annals 
of  England  to  be  the  Irish  chapter,  written,  as  it  had  been, 
by  English  arrogance,  hatred,  and  unintelligence.  Recon- 
ciliation had  been  his  keynote  hitherto.  Moreover,  to  him 
there  seemed  but  two  alternatives — either  further  reform 
along  the  lines  desired  by  the  Irish,  or  the  old,  sad  story 
of  hard  yet  unsuccessful  coercion.  Mr.  Gladstone  would 
have  nothing  more  to  do  with  the  latter  method.  He,  there- 
fore, resolved  to  endeavor  to  give  to  Ireland  the  Home  Rule 
she  plainly  desired.  On  the  8th  of  April,  1886,  he  intro- 
duced the  Insh  Government  Bill,  announcing  that  it  would 
be  followed  by  a  Land  Bill,  the  two  parts  of  a  single  scheme 
which  could  not  be  separated. 

The  bill,  thus  introduced,  provided  for  an  Irish  Parlia- 


HOME  RULE  BILL  501 

ment  to  sit  in  Dublin,  controlling  a  ministry  of  its  own,  and 

legislating  on  Irish,  as  distinguished  from  imperial  affairs. 

A  difficulty  arose  right  here.       If  the   Irish  were  to   have  Shall  the 

a  legislature  of  their  own  for  their  own  affairs,  ought  they 

•  •     •       1  T  •  •  1  1     ^^  West- 

still  to  sit  m  the  Parliament  in  London,  with  power  there  minster? 

to  mix  in  English  and  Scotch  affairs?  On  the  other  hand, 
if  they  ceased  to  have  members  in  London,  they  would  have 
no  share  in  legislating  for  the  Empire  as  a  whole.  "  This," 
says  Morley,  "  was  from  the  first,  and  has  ever  since  re- 
mained, the  Gordian  knot."  The  bill  provided  that  they 
should  be  excluded  from  the  Parliament  at  Westminster. 
On  certain  topics  it  was  further  provided  that  the  Irish 
Parliament  should  never  legislate,  questions  affecting  the 
Crown,  the  army  and  navy,  foreign  and  colonial  affairs; 
nor  could  it  establish  or  endow  any  religion.  After  two 
years  it  was  to  have  control  of  the  Irish  police.  Ireland 
must  contribute  a  certain  proportion  to  the  imperial  ex- 
penses, one-fourteenth,  instead  of  two-seventeenths,  as  had 
been  the  case  since  1801. 

Mr.  Gladstone  did  not  believe  that  the  Irish  difficulty 
would  be  solved  simply  by  new  political  machinery.  There 
was  a  serious  social  question  not  reached  by  this,  the  land 
question.       He   introduced   immediately    a   land   bill,   which  Land 

was  to  effect  a  vast  transfer  of  land  by  purchase  from  land-  ^^^^^chase 

.  Bill, 

lords  to  peasants,  and  which  might  perhaps  involve  an  ex- 
penditure to  the  State  of  about  120,000,000  pounds. 

The  introduction  of  these  bills,  whose  passage  would  mean 
a  radical  transformation  of  Ireland,  precipitated  one  of 
the    fiercest    struggles    in    English    parliamentary    annals.  Opposition 

They  were  urged  as  necessary  to  settle  the  question  once  *°  ''^^ 

,  111-  1  tills, 

for   all   on  a   solid  basis,   as   adapted   to   bring  peace   and 

contentment   to    Ireland,    and    thus    strengthen    the    Union. 

Otherwise,  said  those  who  supported  them,  England  had  no 

alternative  but  coercion,  a  dreary  and  dismal  failure.      On 

the  other  hand,  the  strongest  opposition  arose  out  of  the 

belief  that  these  bills  imperiled  the  very   existence  of  the 


50^ 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


The  union 
in  danger! 


English 
dislike  of 
the  Irish. 


Union.  The  exclusion  of  the  Irish  members  from  Parlia- 
ment seemed  to  many  to  be  the  snapping  of  the  cords  that 
held  the  countries  together.  Did  not  this  bill  really  dis- 
member the  British  Empire.'*  Needless  to  say,  no  British 
statesman  could  urge  any  measure  of  that  character.  Glad- 
stone thought  that  his  bills  meant  the  reconciliation  of  two 
peoples  estranged  for  centuries,  and  that  reconciliation 
meant  the  strengthening  rather  than  the  weakening  of  the 
Empire,  that  the  historic  policy  of  England  towards  Ireland 
had  only  resulted  in  alienation,  hatred,  the  destruction  of 
the  spiritual  harmony  which  is  essential  to  real  unity.  But, 
said  his  opponents,  to  give  the  Irish  a  parliament  of  their 
own,  and  to  exclude  them  from  the  Parliament  in  London, 
to  give  them  control  of  their  own  legislature,  their  own 
executive,  their  own  judiciary,  their  own  police,  must  lead 
inevitably  to  separation.  You  exclude  them  from  all  par- 
ticipation in  imperial  affairs,  thus  rendering  their  patriotism 
the  more  intensely  local.  You  provide,  it  is  time,  that  they 
shall  bear  a  part  of  the  burdens  of  the  Empire.  Is  this 
proviso  worth  the  paper  it  is  written  on.^*  Will  they  not 
next  regard  this  as  a  grievance,  this  taxation  without 
representation,  and  will  not  the  old  animosity  break  out 
anew.''  You  abandon  the  Protestants  of  Ireland  to  the 
revenge  of  the  Catholic  majority  of  the  new  Parliament. 
To  be  sure,  you  provide  for  toleration  in  Ireland,  but  again 
is  this  toleration  worth  the  paper  it  is  written  on  ? 

Probably  the  strongest  force  in  opposition  to  the  bill  was 
the  opinion  widely  held  in  England  of  Irishmen,  that  they  were 
thoroughly  disloyal  to  the  Empire,  that  they  would  delight 
to  use  their  new  autonomy  to  pay  oif  old  scores  by  aiding 
the  enemies  of  England,  that  they  were  traitors  in  disguise, 
or  undisguised,  that  they  had  no  regard  for  property  or 
contract,  that  an  era  of  religious  oppression  and  of  con- 
fiscation of  property  would  be  inaugurated  by  this  new 
agency  of  a  parliament  of  their  own.  These  feelings  were 
expressed  in  characteristic  ways  bv  the  leader  of  the  Opposi- 


OPrOSITION  TO  HOME  RULE  BILL         503 

tion,  Lord  Salisbury,  and  by  Mr.  Gladstone's  close  friend 
and  previous  political  ally,  John  Bright.  Lord  Salisbury 
expressed  all  the  contempt  of  an  aristocrat  belonging  to  a 
superior  race.  "  Ireland,  he  declared,  is  not  one  nation, 
but  two  nations.  There  were  races  like  the  Hottentots, 
and  even  the  Hindoos,  incapable  of  self-government.  He 
would  not  place  confidence  in  people  who  had  acquired  the 
habit  of  using  knives  and  slugs.  His  policy  was  that  Par- 
liament should  enable  the  government  of  England  to  govern 
Ireland.  '  Apply  the  recipe  honestly,  consistently,  and 
resolutely  for  twenty  years,  and  at  the  end  of  that  time 
you  will  find  that  Ireland  will  be  fit  to  accept  any  gifts 
in  the  way  of  local  government  or  repeal  of  coercion  laws 
that  you  may  wish  to  give  her.'  "  ^  He  added  that  rather 
than  spend  the  money  in  buying  out  the  Irish  landlords,  it 
would  be  far  better  to  spend  it  in  assisting  the  emigration 
of   a   million    Irishmen.       Mr.    Bright's  opposition  differed  John 

in  temper,  and  was  far  more  damaging  in  its  effects.      He    "^  .^f 

^  .  ,  J.     opposition, 

had  long  been  known  as  the  friend  of  Ireland,  as  a  dis- 
believer in  the  policy  of  coercion,  as  an  advocate  of  meas- 
ures adapted  to  relieve  the  discontent  of  the  people.  But 
he  disliked  intensely  the  idea  of  a  second  parliament  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  which  he  did  not  think  would  be  successful 
or  work  harmoniously  with  the  Parliament  in  London ;  he 
believed  a  new  parliament  would  prove  most  oppressive  to 
Irish  Protestants ;  he  spoke  with  extreme  bitterness  of  the 
Irish  party  in  Parliament,  and  its  policy  for  the  last  six 
years ;  he  did  not  believe  these  men  either  loyal  or  honorable 
or  truthful,  and  he  did  believe  that,  if  they  obtained  a  Par- 
liament of  their  own,  they  would  use  It  against  England. 

Bitter  personalities  abounded  in  the  debate.  One  mem- 
ber characterized  the  plan  as  the  offspring  of  "  verbosity 
and  senility,"  as  the  "  foolish  work  "  of  "  an  old  man  in  a 
hurry."  It  was  evident  that  the  Home  Rule  Bill  had  aroused 
an  amount  of  bitterness  unknown  in  recent  English  history. 
'  Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone,  III,  317,  318. 


604 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


Disruption, 
of  the 
Liberal 
Party 


The  bill 
defeated. 


The 

Conserva- 
tives re- 
turned  to 
power. 


The  Conservative  party  opposed  it  to  a  man.  And  the 
Liberal  party  was  in  full  process  of  disruption  because  of  it. 
Even  before  the  measure  was  brought  in,  many  men  who 
had  hitherto  worked  side  by  side  with  Mr.  Gladstone  in 
his  previous  ministries,  withdrew  and  went  over  to  the  Con- 
servatives. These  men  called  themselves  Liberal-Unionists, 
Liberals,  but  not  men  who  were  prepared  to  jeopardize  the 
Union,  as  they  held  that  this  measure  would  do — Lord  Hart- 
ington  (later  the  Duke  of  Devonshire),  Mr.  Bright,  Joseph 
Chamberlain,  Mr.  Goschen,  and  many  others.  All  the  jour- 
nals of  London,  with  the  exception  of  one  morning  and 
one  evening  paper,  were  vigorously  opposed.  The  crucial 
question  was,  how  large  the  secession  from  the  Liberal  party 
would  he?  Would  it  be  large  enough  to  offset  the  Irish 
vote  which  would  be  cast  for  the  measure.?  Finally  a 
vote  was  taken  on  the  8th  of  June,  on  the  second  reading 
of  the  bill.  It  was  found  that  93  Liberals  had  joined  the 
Opposition,  and  that  the  Home  Rule  Bill  was  beaten  by  343 
votes  to  313.  The  total  poll  was  thus  enormous,  656  out  of 
the  670  members  of  the  House.  Between  one-third  and  one- 
fourth  of  the  Liberal  party  had  withdrawn  from  it  on 
account  of  this  fateful  measure. 

Mr.  Gladstone  dissolved  Parliament  and  appealed  to  the 
people.  The  question  was  vehemently  discussed  before  the 
voters.  The  result  was  disastrous  to  the  Gladstonian  Home 
Rulers.  191  Gladstonians  and  85  Irish  Home  Rulers  were 
returned,  and  316  Conservatives  and  78  Liberal-Unionists. 
Thus  a  majority  of  over  a  hundred  was  rolled  up  against 
Gladstone's  policy.  Taking  England  alone,  the  result  was 
even  more  striking.  There  he  had  only  125  seats  out  of 
455 ;  in  London  only  11  out  of  62.  On  the  other  hand, 
Scotland  approved  in  the  ratio  of  3  to  2,  Wales  of  5  to  1. 
Mr.  Gladstone  did  not  consider  that  such  a  result  settled 
the  issue  irrevocably. 

Lord  Salisbury  had  said  that  if  Parliament  would  rule 
Ireland  resolutely  for  twenty  years,  at  the  end  of  that  time 


SECOND  SALISBURY  MINISTRY  505 

she  would   be   fit  to   accept   any  gifts   in   the  line   of  local  The    Second 
government  or  repeal  of  coercion  acts  that  Parliament  might  Salisbury 
see  fit  to  give  her.      He  was  now  prime  minister,  and  in  a  igog.ioQo 
position   to    put    his    opinion    into    force.       Coercion    more 
severe  than  that  of  previous  years  was  the  policy  adopted 
by  this  ministry,  largely  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  Arthur 
James    Balfour,    Chief    Secretary    for   Ireland.       That    the 
measures  followed  were  stringent  was  shown  by  a  statement  The 
of  Sir  George  Trevelyan  that  of  the  eighty-five  Irish  Na-  Po^^^y  °^ 
tionalist   members,   one   out   of   every    seven   was    in   prison, 
on  his  way  to  prison,  or  on  his  way  out  of  prison.      Need- 
less  to   say,   no    reconciliation   was   to   be   effected   by   such 
methods.      The  exasperation  of  the  Irish  was  only  intensi- 
fied.     Nevertheless,  the  system  steadily  applied  was  success- 
ful at  least  in  restoring  quiet.      In  1890  it  was  found  possible 
to  relax  it  somewhat. 

But  the  policy  of  this  ministry  was  not  simply  negative. 
The  idea  that  buying  out  the  landlords  and  enabling  the 
peasants  to  become  full  owners  of  their  farms  would  solve 
the  agrarian  question,  and  that  the  agrarian  question  was 
at  the  root  of  Irish  discontent,  was  no  discovery  of  a 
Conservative  ministry.  Clauses  with  this  in  view  had  been 
inserted  in  Gladstone's  Land  Acts  of  1870  and  1881,  and 
the  Land  Bill  of  1886  was  a  gigantic  measure  designed  to 
effect  this  on  a  grand  scale.  That  measure,  however, 
frightened  the  taxpayers  by  the  amount  of  the  expenditure 
involved,  and,  moreover,  it  necessarily  fell  with  the  Home 
Rule  Bill,  of  which  it  was  intended  to  be  the  companion 
piece.  Gladstone's  earlier  acts  had  not  had  great  effect,  as 
the  State  had  offered  to  advance  only  two-thirds  of  the 
purchase  price.  The  present  plan  provided  that  the  State 
should  advance  the  whole  of  it,  to  be  repaid  by  instalments 
until  at  the  end  of  forty-nine  years  the  peasant  would  have 
his  land  as  an  unencumbered  freehold.  Thirty-three  million 
pounds  were  set  aside  for  the  purpose.  The  landlords  were 
not  required  to  sell,  but  the  issue  has  proved  them  willing  to 


506 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


Land 

Purchase 

Act. 


County 

government 

reformed. 


do  so  in  a  large  number  of  cases.  The  Government  buys  the 
land,  sells  it  to  the  peasant,  who  that  instant  becomes  its 
legal  owner,  and  who  pays  for  it  gradually.  He  actually 
pays  less  in  this  way  each  year  than  he  formerly  paid  for 
rent,  and  in  the  end  he  has  his  holding  unencumbered. 
This  bill  was  passed  in  1891,  and  in  five  years  some  35,000 
tenants  were  thus  enabled  to  purchase  their  holdings  under 
its  provisions.  The  system  was  extended  much  further  in 
later  years,  particularly  by  the  Land  Act  of  1903.  From 
1903  to  1908  there  were  about  160,000  purchasers. 

A  most  important  piece  of  legislation  carried  by  this 
ministry  was  the  County  Councils  Act  of  1888.  This 
act  rendered  the  county  governments  of  England  and  Wales 
democratic.  Those  governments  had  previously  been  en- 
tirely unrepresentative  in  character.  They  had  been  mainly 
in  the  hands  of  the  landlord  class,  members  of  which  were 
appointed  by  the  Queen  as  magistrates  or  justices  of  the 
peace.  As  such  they  met  four  times  a  year  in  quarter 
sessions,  and  there  regulated  county  affairs,  levying  taxes, 
discharging  certain  judicial  functions,  regulating  the  liquor 
trade,  and  the  building  and  repair  of  highways,  and  super- 
vising the  actions  of  the  officials  of  smaller  areas.  County 
government  was  in  the  hands  of  an  oligarchy.  The  new 
act  placed  it  in  the  hands  of  all  ratepayers,  who  were 
to  elect  county  councils  for  a  tenn  of  three  years,  which 
were  to  conduct  the  local  administration,  with  the  exception 
of  granting  liquor  licenses,  a  function  which  was  to  remain 
in  the  hands  of  the  justices  of  the  peace.  Thus  county 
government  was  made  democratic.  As  local  self-govern- 
ment had  been  established  in  the  boroughs  in  1835,  it  was  now 
established  in  the  counties.  This  was  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant achievements  of  this  ministry.  In  1889  a  similar  bill 
was  passed  for  Scotland.    Ireland  lay  outside  this  legislation. 

This  ministry  passed  other  bills  of  a  distinctly  liberal 
character ;  among  them  an  act  absolutely  prohibiting  the  em- 
ployment of  children  under  ten,  an  act  designed  to  reduce  the 


THE  FOURTH  GLADSTONE  MINISTRY      507 

oppression  of  the  sweat-shop  by  limiting  the  labor  of  women  Social 
to  twelve  hours  a  day,  with  an  hour  and  a  half  for  meals,  ^S^s^^t^o^' 
an  act  making  education  free,  and  a  small  allotment  act 
intended  to  create  a  class  of  peasant  proprietors  in  Eng- 
land. These  measures  were  supported  by  all  parties. 
They  were  important  as  indicating  that  social  legislation 
was  likely  to  be  in  the  coming  years  more  important  than 
political  legislation,  which  has  proved  to  be  the  case.  They 
also  show  that  the  Conservative  party  was  changing  in 
character,  and  was  willing  to  assume  a  leading  part  in  social 
reform. 

In  respect  to  another  item  of  internal  policy,  the  Salis-  Increase  of 
bury  ministry  took  a  stand  which  has  been  decisive  ever 
since.  In  1889  it  secured  an  immense  increase  of  the  navy. 
Seventy  ships  were  to  be  added  at  an  expense  of  21,500,000 
pounds  during  the  next  seven  years.  Lord  Salisbury  laid 
it  down  as  a  principle  that  the  British  navy  ought  to  be 
equal  to  any  other  two  navies  of  the  world  combined. 

In  foreign  affairs  the  most  important  work  of  this  min- 
istry lay  in  its  share  in  the  partition  of  Africa,  which  will 
be  described  elsewhere. 

The  general  elections  of  1892  resulted  In  the  return  to  The  Fourth 
power  of  the  Liberals,  supported  by  the  Irish  Home  Rulers,  ^^^adstone 
and  Mr.   Gladstone,  at  the  age  of  eighty-two,  became  for  1892-1894. 
the   fourth   time   prime   minister,   a   record   unparalleled   In 
English   history.       As    he   himself   said,   the   one   single   tie 
that    still    bound    him    to    public    life    was    his    interest    in 
securing  Home  Rule   for  Ireland  before  his   end.       It   fol- 
lowed  necessarily   from   the   nature   of   the    case   that  pub- 
lic  attention   was    immediately    concentrated   anew   on   that 
question.       Early    In    1893    Mr.    Gladstone    Introduced   his 
second  Home   Rule  Bill.       Again   the  crucial   difficulty  was  The   second 

found  to  be  that  of  the  retention  or  non-retention  of  Irish  ^<*™^   ^^^^ 

Bill 
representatives  in  the  Parliament  in  London.      There  were 

three   possible   methods — total    exclusion,    inclusion    for    all 

purposes,  or  inclusion  for  certain  specified  purposes.      The 


508 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


Funda- 
mental 
objections. 


bill  of  1886  was  based  on  the  first  (with  slight  exceptions), 
and  innncdiately  the  cry  had  been  raised,  and  had  been 
most  effective,  that  the  unity  of  the  kingdom  was  threatened. 
In  the  new  bill  the  third  method  was  adopted.  It  was 
provided  that  Ireland  should  send  eighty  members  to  West- 
minster, but  that  they  were  not  to  vote  on  questions  ex- 
pressly confined  to  England  and  Scotland,  on  taxes  which 
were  not  to  be  levied  in  Ireland,  or  on  appropriations  for 
other  than  imperial  concerns.^ 

On  this  point  the  debate  raged  for  a  whole  week.  Mr. 
Gladstone  was  forced  to  change  ground  completely,  and 
to  propose  the  unconditional  admission  of  the  Irish  members 
to  the  Parliament  in  London,  with  right  to  vote  on  all 
matters.  Exclusion,  as  in  1886 ;  partial  inclusion  as  pro- 
posed in  1893 ;  total  inclusion  as  finally  accepted  by  the 
ministry,  these  were  the  three  possible  ways  of  treating  this 
crucial  question.  On  this  fundamental  matter  Lord  Morley 
has  written  as  follows :  "  Each  of  the  three  courses  was  open 
to  at  least  one  single,  but  very  direct  objection.  Exclusion, 
along  with  the  exaction  of  revenue  from  Ireland  by  the  Par- 
liament at  Westminster,  was  taxation  without  representation. 
Inclusion  for  all  purposes  was  to  allow  the  Irish  to  meddle  in 
our  affairs,  while  we  were  no  longer  to  meddle  in  theirs. 
Inclusion  for  limited  purposes  still  left  them  invested  with 
the  power  of  turning  out  a  British  government  by  a  vote 
against  it  on  an  imperial  question.  Each  plan,  therefore, 
ended  in  a  paradox.  There  was  a  fourth  paradox,  namely, 
that  whenever  the  British  supporters  of  a  government  did 
not  suffice  to  build  up  a  decisive  majority,  then  the  Irish 
vote,  descending  into  one  or  other  scale  of  parliamentary 
balance,  might  decide  who  should  be  our  rulers.  This  para- 
dox— the  most  glaring  of  them  all — habit  and  custom  have 
made  familiar."  ^ 

^The  bill  of  1893  provided  for  two  chambers  in  the  Irish  parliament; 
the  bill  of  1886  had  provided  for  one  chamber. 
=  Morley,  Gladstone,  III,  498. 


DEFEAT  OF  HOME  RULE  BILL  509 

The  opposition  to  the  bill  was  exceedingly  bitter  and  Bitterness 
prolonged.  Very  few  new  arguments  were  brought  forward  °  ^  . 
on  either  side.  Party  spirit  ran  riot.  Mr.  Chamberlain 
was  called  Judas,  and  he  in  turn  called  Gladstone  Herod. 
Lord  Salisbury  called  the  proposal  "  an  intolerable,  an  im- 
becile, an  accursed  bill."  Lord  Randolph  Churchill  declared 
that  the  Irish  leaders  were  "  political  brigands  and  nihilists," 
and  that  the  ministry  was  "  as  capricious  as  a  woman, 
and  as  impulsive  and  as  passionate  as  a  horde  of  barbarians." 

Mr.  Gladstone,  who,  incidentally,  kept  his  temper,  ex- 
pressed with  all  his  eloquence  his  faith  in  the  Irish  people, 
his  belief  that  the  only  alternative  to  his  policy  was  coercion, 
and  that  coercion  would  be  forever  unsuccessful,  his  con- 
viction that  it  was  the  duty  of  England  to  atone  for  six 
centuries  of  misrule. 

After  eighty-two  days  of  discussion,  marked  by  scenes  of  I*assed  by 

great  disorder,  members  on  one  occasion  comina;  to  blows      ^     ^^' 

.  .  .  mons, 

to  the  great  damage  of  decorous  parliamentary  traditions,  the  defeated  by 

bill  was   carried  by   a  majority   of  34   (301    to   267).       A  the  Lords. 

week  later  it  was  defeated  in  the  House  of  Lords  by  419 

to  41,  or  a  majority  of  more  than  ten  to  one.      The  bill 

was  dead. 

Gladstone   attempted   to   carry   through  various   English 

measures,  but  here  again  he  was   foiled  by  the  hereditary 

chamber.     A  single  legislative  reform  was  enacted,  the  Parish  Parish 

Councils  Bill  of  1894.      This  established  in  every  parish  of    ^^^^^ 

Bill, 
more  than  300  inhabitants  a  council  elected  by  the  taxpayers, 

and  gave  them   certain   powers    of  self-government.       This 

was  the  natural  supplement  to  the  County  Councils  Act  of 

1888,  completing  the  process  of  constitutional  reform  which 

began   in  1832.      Agricultural  laborers  were  henceforth  to 

have  a  political  training  in  participating  in  the  management 

of  local  affairs. 

Mr.  Gladstone's  fourth  ministry  was  balked  successfully 

at   every   turn  by   the   House   of   Lords,   which,   under   the 

able  leadership  of  Lord  Salisbury,  recovered  an  actual  power 


610 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


Resigrna- 
tion  of 
Gladstone. 


The 

Rosebery 
Ministry. 


it  liad  not  possessed  since  1832.  In  1894  Mr.  Gladstone 
resigned  his  office,  thus  bringing  to  a  close  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  political  careers  known  to  English  history.  His 
last  speech  in  Parliament  was  a  vigorous  attack  upon  the 
House  of  Lords.  In  his  opinion,  that  House  had  become 
the  great  obstacle  to  progress.  "  The  issue  which  is  raised 
between  a  deliberative  assembly,  elected  by  the  votes  of 
more  than  6,000,000  people,"  and  an  hereditary  body,  "  is  a 
controversy  which,  when  once  raised,  must  go  forward  to 
an  issue."  This  speech  was  his  last  in  an  assembly  where 
his  first  had  been  delivered  sixty-one  years  before. 
Gladstone  died  four  years  later,  and  was  buried  in  West- 
minster Abbey  (1898). 

He  was  succeeded  in  the  premiership  by  Lord  Rosebery, 
whose  ministry  lasted  only  sixteen  months.  The  withdrawal 
of  Gladstone  showed  the  many  rifts  in  the  Liberal  party, 
which  a  leader  of  less  prestige  and  less  commanding  per- 
sonality could  not  close.  The  party  was  discouraged  by 
its  failure  to  achieve  Home  Rule,  was  balked  by  the  House 
of  Lords,  was  divided  into  groups  desiring  various  things, 
and  was  feebly  supported  by  the  people.  Such  a  ministry 
could  not  long  endure.  Rosebery  alienated  the  Irish  by  de- 
claring that  he  agreed  with  Lord  Salisbury,  that  before 
Home  Rule  should  be  granted  Ireland,  "  England,  as  the 
predominant  member  of  the  partnership  of  the  three  king- 
doms, wnll  have  to  be  convinced  of  its  justice." 

The  Rosebery  ministry  accomplished  very  little.  Its 
campaign  against  the  House  of  Lords  was  half-hearted  and 
ineffective.  In  one  sphere,  where  the  Lords  were  by  custom 
forbidden  to  interfere  in  financial  matters,  it  made  an  im- 
portant change.  England  w^as  now  involved  in  the  wide- 
spread militaristic  movement,  which  is  one  of  the  striking 
features  of  the  closing  nineteenth  century.  In  England  it 
took  the  form  of  very  largely  increasing  the  navy,  and  the 
principle  was  now  being  accepted  which  has  since  become 
an  axiom  in  British  policy,  of  making  the  British  fleet  the 


THE  ROSEBERY  MINISTRY  511 

equal  of  any  two  foreign  fleets  combined.  This  involved 
much  larger  taxation.  In  the  budget  of  1894,  the  work 
of  Sir  William  Vernon  Harcourt,  the  principle  of  graduation 
was  introduced  into  the  inheritance  taxes.  The  tax  im- 
posed by  the  state  was  to  vary  from  one  per  cent,  on  estates 
of  five  hundred  pounds  to  eight  per  cent,  on  estates  of  over 
a  million  pounds.  This  change  was  bitterly  resented  by 
the  wealthy. 

In  June  1895  the  Rosebery  ministry  was  defeated  on  a  The  Con- 
minor   matter   and    seized    the    occasion    to    resign.       Lord  servatives 

Salisbury  became  prime  minister.      A  general  election  was 

,  ,  power. 

at   once   held,   which   proved   to   be   a   crushing   defeat    for 

the  Liberals.      The  Conservatives  and  the  Liberal-Unionists, 

or  the  Unionist  party,  as  it  was  generally  called,  so  thorough 

had  become  the  amalgamation  of  the  two,  had  a  majority 

in   the   new    Parliament    of    about    a    hundred    and    fifty,    a 

larger  majority  than  any  party  had  had  in  any  parliament 

since  the  one  chosen  immediately  after  the  Reform  Bill  of 

1832.      This  party  was  to  remain  uninterruptedly  in  power 

until  December  1905. 

Lord   Salisbury   was    now   prime   minister    for   the   third  -"-^^  Third 

time.      He  remained  such  until  1902,  when  he  withdrew  from  _..   .  . 

'  Ministry. 

public  life,  being  succeeded  by  his  nephew,  Mr.  Arthur  James 
Balfour.  There  was,  however,  no  change  of  party.  Lord 
Salisbury  had  an  immense  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. His  ministry  contained  several  very  able  men.  He 
himself  assumed  the  Foreign  Office,  Mr.  Chamberlain  the 
Colonial  Office,  Mr.  Balfour  the  leadership  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  The  withdrawal  of  Mr.  Gladstone  and  the 
divisions  in  the  Liberal  party  reduced  that  party  to  a  posi- 
tion of  ineff*ective  opposition.  The  Irish  question  sank 
into  the  background.  Much  social  and  labor  legislation 
was  enacted.  The  commanding  question  of  this  period  was 
to  be  that  of  imperialism,  and  the  central  figure  was  Mr. 
Joseph  Chamberlain,  a  man  remarkable  for  vigor  and  au- 
dacity,   and    the    most    popular    member    of    the    cabinet. 


South 
Africa. 


612  ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 

Chaiubcrlain,  who  had  made  his  reputation  as  an  advanced 
Liberal,  an  advocate  of  radical  social  and  economic  reforms, 
now  stood  forth  as  the  spokesman  of  imperialism.  His  office, 
that  of  Colonial  Secretary,  gave  him  excellent  opportunities 
to  emphasize  the  importance  of  the  colonics  to  the  mother 
country,  the  desirability  of  drawing  them  closer  together, 
of  promoting  imperial  federation. 
War  in  j^  period  of  great  activity  in  foreign  and  colonial  affairs 

began  almost  immediately  after  the  inauguration  of  the  new 
ministry.  The  most  important  chapter  in  this  activity 
concerned  the  conditions  in  South  Africa,  which  led,  in  1899, 
to  the  Boer  War,  and  which  had  important  consequences. 
This  will  better  be  described  elsewhere.^ 

The  Conservatives,  resolutely  opposed  to  the  policy  of 
an  independent  parliament  in  Ireland,  and  conscious  that 
in  this  they  had  the  support  of  the  people,  declined  abso- 
lutely to  consider  Home  Rule.  But  they  proposed  to  "kill 
Home  Rule  by  kindness,"  as  the  phi'ase  ran.  Rigorous 
coercion  for  the  suppression  of  disorder  was  united  with 
a  Land  Purchase  Bill,  of  the  now  familiar  type,  aiming  to 
facilitate,  more  than  previous  bills  had  done,  the  buying 
out  of  the  landlords  and  the  creation  of  a  peasant  pro- 
Irish  local  prietorship  of  the  soil  of  Ireland  (1896).  More  important 
^^  was  the  Irish  Local  Government  Act  of  1898,  which  aimed 

to  give  some  measure  of  local  self-government  to  the  Insh 
by  establishing  there,  as  had  been  done  in  England,  county 
councils  and  district  councils,  but  not  parish  councils. 
These  bodies,  which  were  to  possess  considerable  powers  in 
the  management  of  local  affairs,  were  to  be  elected  on  a 
franchise  identical  with  the  parliamentary  franchise,  except 
that  Peers  and  women  might  vote.  This  was,  of  course,  no 
substitute  for  Home  Rule,  nor  was  it  intended  to  be. 

The  South  African  war,  from  1899  to  1902,  absorbed  the 
attention  of  England  until  its  successful  termination.  In- 
ternal  legislation   was    of   slight    importance.     During    the 

>  Pages   541-544. 


EDUCATION  ACT  OF  1902  513 

war  Queen  Victoria  died,  January  22,  1901,  after  a  reign  Death  of 

of    over    sixty-three    years,    the    loneest    known    in    British  ^^®^^ 

Victoria, 
history,    and   only    exceeded    elsewhere   by    the    seventy-one 

years'  reign  of  Louis  XIV  of  France.  She  had  proved 
during  her  entire  reign,  which  began  in  1837,  a  model  con- 
stitutional monarch,  subordinating  her  will  to  that  of  the 
people,  as  expressed  by  the  ministry  and  Parliament.  "  She 
passed  away,"  said  Mr.  Balfour  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
"  without  an  enemy  in  the  world,  for  even  those  who  loved 
not  England  loved  her."  The  reign  of  Edward  VII,  then 
in  liis  sixty-second  year,  began. 

A  very  important  measure  passed  by   this   Conservative  Education 

ministry   was   the  Education   Act   of   1902.       The   Forster  ,^^^^ 
•^  ,  .  .  1902. 

Act  of  1870,  which  had  remained  the  basis  of  the  elementary 

educational  system  of  England  since  its  passage,  had 
adopted  the  voluntary  or  denominational  schools,  and  had 
added,  where  these  were  not  adequate,  board  schools.  Both 
were  to  receive  generally  fees  from  their  pupils  and  grants 
from  Parliament.  In  addition,  tlie  voluntary  schools  were 
to  receive  voluntary  gifts  as  hitherto,  and  the  board  schools 
local  taxes  levied  for  the  purpose  by  the  boards.  As  the 
years  went  by,  the  voluntary  schools  found  that  they  were 
being  handicapped  by  the  fact  that  the  board  schools  had 
larger  financial  resources  than  they.  The  parliamentary 
grants  were  conditioned  in  amount  by  the  sums  raised 
in  the  other  ways  by  the  two  kinds  of  schools.  Now  the 
board  schools  could,  by  raising  more  from  taxation,  earn 
larger  grants  from  Parliament,  while  the  voluntary 
schools,  relying  upon  private  subscriptions,  could  not  gain 
increased  appropriations  unless  they  could  get  larger  sub- 
scriptions. W^hile  they  were  able  to  do  this  for  a  while, 
they  were  not  able  to  in  the  long  run.  In  1900  the  average 
amount  per  pupil  was  somewhat  less  than  thirty  years  be- 
fore. They  were  thus  at  a  disadvantage  compared  with 
the  board  schools.  The  voluntary  schools,  Avhich  were  for 
the  most  part  connected  with  the  Church  of  England,  began 


514 


ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 


Abolition 
of  the 
School 
Boards. 


to  demand  further  help  from  Parliament.  In  1897  they 
were  given  an  additional  subsidy,  which,  in  their  opinion, 
was  not  large  enough.  Their  agitation  continued  and  re- 
sulted finally  in  the  passage  of  the  Act  of  1902. 

By  this  the  school  boards,  established  in  1870,  were  abol- 
ished, and  their  powers  were  vested  in  the  county  and 
borough  councils,  that  is,  in  the  regular  local  government 
bodies.  These  were  to  support  both  sets  of  schools,  the 
former  board  and  the  voluntary,  out  of  local  taxes,  parlia- 
mentary grants  continuing.  In  other  words,  local  taxes 
were  to  be  raised  for  denominational  schools,  as  well  as  for 
undenominational,  parliamentary  grants,  as  hitherto,  also 
going  to  both.  The  actual  management  of  the  former  board 
schools  was  to  be  in  the  hands  of  a  committee  of  the  county 
or  borough  council.  That  of  the  church  schools  was  to 
be  in  the  hands  of  a  committee  of  six,  two  of  whom  were  to 
represent  the  county  or  borough  council,  while  four  were 
to  represent  the  denomination.  In  other  words,  people  were 
to  be  taxed  for  both  sets  of  schools,  but  were  to  control  only 
one.  The  bill  gave  great  offense  to  Dissenters  and  be- 
lievers in  secular  education.  It  authorized  taxation  for  the 
advantage  of  a  denomination  of  which  multitudes  of  tax- 
payers were  not  members.  It  was  held  to  be  a  measure 
for  increasing  the  power  of  the  Church  of  England.  The 
conscience  clause  was  applied  to  all  schools,  as  hitherto. 

The  opposition  to  this  law  was  intense.  Thousands  re- 
fused to  pay  their  taxes,  and  their  property  was,  therefore, 
sold  by  public  authority  to  meet  the  taxes.  Many  were 
imprisoned.  There  were  over  70,000  summonses  to  court. 
The  agitation  thus  aroused  was  one  of  the  great  causes 
for  the  crushing  defeat  of  the  Conservative  party  in  1905. 
Yet  the  law  of  1902  was  put  into  force  and  is  at  this 
moment  the  law  of  England,  the  Liberals  having  failed 
in  1906  in  an  attempt  to  pass  an  education  bill  of  their 
own  to  supersede  it.  The  educational  system  remains  one 
of  the   contentious   problems    of   English   politics.       Mean- 


OLD  AGE  PENSIONS  515 

while,  under  the  operation  of  the  laws  passed  in  review,  Decline 
illiteracy,  very  general  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  has  almost  entirely  disappeared.  In  1843,  32  per 
cent,  of  the  men,  49  per  cent,  of  the  women,  were  illiterate, 
whereas  in  1903  only  two  per  cent,  of  the  former  and  three 
of  the  latter  were  in  this  condition. 

Since  December  1905  the  Liberal  party  has  been  in  .power.  The  literal 
first  under  the  premiership  of  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Banner-  party  in 
man,  and,  since  his  death  early  in  1908,  under  that  of  Mr.  ^ 
Herbert  Asquith.  This  party  won  in  the  General  Elections 
of  1906  (January  and  February)  the  largest  majority  ever 
obtained  since  1832.  The  most  important  achievement  of 
this  administration  thus  far  has  been  the  passage  in  1908 
of  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Act,  which  marks  a  long  step  Old  Age 
forward  in  the  extension  of  state  activity.  It  grants,  under  I*ensions 
certain  slight  restrictions,  pensions  to  all  persons  of  a  cer- 
tain age  and  of  a  small  income.  Denounced  as  paternal- 
istic, as  socialistic,  as  sure  to  undermine  the  thrift  and  the 
sense  of  responsibility  of  the  laborers  of  Great  Britain,  it 
was  urged  as  a  reasonable  and  proper  recognition  of  the 
value  of  the  services  to  the  country  of  the  working  classes, 
services  as  truly  to  be  rewarded  as  those  of  army  and  navy 
and  administration.  The  act  provides  that  those  whose 
income  does  not  exceed  twenty-five  guineas  a  year  shall 
receive  a  weekly  pension  of  five  shillings,  that  those  with 
larger  incomes  shall  receive  proportionately  smaller  amounts, 
down  to  the  minimum  of  one  shilling  a  week.  Those  whose 
income  exceeds  thirty  guineas  and  ten  shillings  a  year  re- 
ceive no  pensions.  Such  pensions  are  granted  only  to 
British  subjects,  who  have  resided  in  Great  Britain  for 
twenty  years,  who  are  at  least  seventy  years  of  age,  and 
are  not  in  receipt  of  poor  relief.  It  was  estimated  by  the 
prime  minister  that  the  initial  burden  to  the  state  would 
be  about  seven  and  a  half  million  pounds,  an  amount  that 
would  necessarily  increase  in  later  years.  The  post  office 
is  used  as  the  distributing  agent.      This  law  went  into  force 


516  ENGLAND  SINCE  1886 

on  January  1,  1909.  On  that  clay  over  half  a  million  men 
and  women  went  to  the  nearest  post  office  and  drew  their 
first  pensions  of  from  one  to  five  shillings,  and  on  every 
Friday  henceforth  as  long  as  they  live  they  may  do  the 
same.  It  was  noticed  that  these  men  and  women  accepted 
their  pensions  not  as  a  form  of  charity  or  poor  relief,  but 
as  an  honorable  reward.  The  statistics  of  those  claiming 
under  this  law  are  instructive  and  sobering.  In  the  county 
of  London  one  person  in  every  one  hundred  and  seventeen 
was  a  claimant;  in  England  and  Wales  one  in  eighty-six; 
in  Scotland  one  in  sixty-seven;  in  Ireland  one  in  twenty-one. 
An  Irish  Another  act  passed  by  this  administration  was  that  estab- 

university.  lishing  an  Irish  university,  which  Catholics  would  feel  free 
to  attend.  Thus  was  solved  in  1908  a  problem  which  Glad- 
stone had  attempted  to  solve  in  1873,  but  without  success. 
The  BiiTell  Act  really  establishes  two  universities — one  in 
Belfast,  consisting  of  the  former  Queen's  College  in  that 
city,  this  for  Protestants ;  and  one  for  Catholics,  to 
have  its  seat  in  Dublin,  and  to  possess  three  colleges,  one 
in  Cork,  one  in  Galway,  and  a  new  college  in  Dublin.  Each 
college  will,  in  reality,  be  an  almost  independent  university, 
practically,  though  not  nominally,  controlling  appointments, 
the  function  of  the  university  body  being  that  of  co-ordina- 
tion and  supervision  only.  No  chapel  is  to  be  erected 
on  the  grounds  of  any  college.  No  professorships  of  the- 
ology may  be  created  out  of  public  moneys.  Such  may 
be  created  bj^  private  gifts,  but  their  occupants  may  not 
sit  with  the  other  professors   on   academic  boards. 

The  present  ministry  has  made  repeated  efforts  to  alter 
the  elementary  educational  system,  based  on  the  law  of 
1902,  but  has  been  blocked  by  the  House  of  Lords.  That 
law  is,  therefore,  still  in  force. 

Questions  of  suffrage  are  becoming  increasingl}^  promi- 
nent, and  are  apparently  verging  toward  a  further  enlarge- 
ment of  the  electorate.  In  recent  years  the  demand  for 
woman  suffrage  has  been  pressed  with  great  vigor  and  con- 


SUFFRAGE  QUESTIONS  517 

fidence.  Women  already  possess  the  franchise  for  most  local 
elections,  but  cannot  yet  vote  for  members  of  Parliament. 
For  twenty  years  plural  voting  has  been  denounced  by 
the  Liberals,  who  desire  to  restrict  each  voter  to  a  single 
vote.  In  1906  the  House  of  Commons  passed  a  bill  abolish- 
ing this  inequality.  It  was  thrown  out  promptly  by  the 
House  of  Lords.  It  is  likely  that  some  comprehensive 
reform,  accompanied  by  a  redistribution  of  seats,  will  be 
effected  in  the  near  future. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

THE    BRITISH    EMPIRE    IN    THE    NINETEENTH 

CENTURY 

The  We  have  thus   far   concerned  ourselves  with  the  history 

expansion  of  the  European  continent.  But  one  of  the  most  remark- 
'  able  features  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  the  reaching 
out  of  Europe  for  the  conquest  of  the  world,  and  the  opening 
of  the  present  century  sees  the  process  far  advanced.  What 
is  known  as  European  civilization  is  in  its  characteristic 
features  becoming  the  civilization  of  all  countries  and  con- 
tinents. The  age  of  world  politics,  of  world  commerce, 
has  come;  the  age  of  a  common  world  culture  appears 
likely  ultimately  to  prevail.  This  extraordinary  transfor- 
The  growth  mation  is  being  effected  by  a  variety  of  agencies,  by  the 
of  colonial  t^uJiding  up  of  great  colonial  empires,  by  conscious  and 
resolute  imitation  of  Europe  on  the  part  of  countries  like 
Japan  and,  very  recently,  by  China,  India,  and  Persia ;  by 
the  elaboration  of  a  marvelous  economic  life,  each  decade 
making  enormous  strides,  of  which  every  nation  and  country 
are  necessary  parts,  bound  securely  together  in  the  mesh 
of  reciprocal  needs  and  advantages.  Peoples  may  no  longer 
live  in  splendid  or  inglorious  isolation,  even  if  they  wish 
to.  European  nations  dominate  directly  immense  regions 
of  the  world  outside  of  Europe,  having  taken  their  destinies 
in  charge.  European  civilization  is  acting  as  a  powerful 
dissolvent  of  other  inferior  or  less  complex  civilizations. 
The  nineteenth  century  was  not  only  a  century  of  nation 
building,  as  we  have  seen,  but  of  empire  building  on  a  colos- 
sal scale.  A  movement  so  vast  in  its  sweep,  so  varied 
in  its   manifestations,  so   momentous   in   its   inevitable   con- 

518 


THE  BRITISH  EMPHIE  IN  1815  519 

sequences,  merits  careful  study.  Of  the  forces  furthering 
this  evolution  undoubtedly  the  most  important  is  the  British 
Empire. 

At  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  England  possessed 
in  the  new  world,  Upper  and  Lower  Canada,  New  Brunswick, 
Nova  Scotia,  Newfoundland,  Prince  Edward  Island,  and  a 
large  vague  region  known  as  the  Hudson  Bay  territory; 
Jamaica,  and  other  West  Indian  islands ;  in  Australia,  a  strip 
of  the  eastern  coast;  in  India,  the  Bengal  or  lower  Ganges 
region,  Bombay,  and  strips  along  the  eastern  and  western 
coasts.  The  most  important  feature  of  her  colonial  policy 
had  been  her  elimination  of  France  as  a  rival,  from  whom  she 
had  taken  in  the  Seven  Years'  War  almost  all  of  her  North 
American  and  East  Indian  possessions.  This  Empire  she  in- 
creased during  the  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  wars, 
largely  at  the  expense  of  France  and  Holland,  the  ally  of 
France.  Thus  she  acquired  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  Guiana 
in  South  America,  Tobago,  Trinidad,  and  St.  Lucia,  Mauri- 
tius in  the  Pacific,  and  the  large  island  of  Ceylon.  In  the 
Mediterranean  she  acquired  Malta.  She  also  obtained  Heli-. 
goland,  and  the  protectorate  of  the  Ionian  Islands. 

Since  1815  her  Empire  has  been  vastly  augmented  by  a  Vast 

lono;   series    of   wars,    and   by   the   natural   advance   of   her  S^owth  of 
,      .  .  .  ...  .      the    British 

colonists  over  countries  contiguous  to  the  early  settlements,  jj^jj^j^g 

as   in    Canada   and   Australia.      Her   Empire   lies   in    every  since  1816. 

quarter  of  the  globe. 

INDIA 

The  acquisition  of  India,  a  world  in  itself,  for  the  British 
crown  was  the  work  of  a  private  commercial  organization, 
the  East  India  Company,  which  was  founded  in  the  six- 
teenth century  and  given  a  monopoly  of  the  trade  with 
India.  This  company  established  trading  stations  in  various 
parts  of  that  peninsula.  Coming  into  conflict  with  the 
French,  and  mixing  in  the  quarrels  of  the  native  princes,  it 
succeeded  in  winning**direct  control  of  large  sections,  and 


520  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Overthrow 
of  the 
Mahratta 
confederacy. 


Annexation 
of  the 
Punjab. 


indirect  control  of  others  by  assuming  protectorates  over 
certain  of  the  princes,  who  allied  themselves  with  the  English 
and  were  left  on  their  thrones.  This  commercial  company 
became  invested  with  the  government  of  these  acquisitions, 
under  the  provisions  of  laws  passed  bj  the  English  Parliament 
at  various  times.  In  the  nineteenth  century  the  area  of 
British  control  steadily  widened,  until  it  became  complete. 
Its  progress  was  immensely  furthered  by  the  overthrow,  after 
a  long  and  intermittent  war,  of  the  Mahratta  confederacy, 
a  loose  union  of  Indian  princes  dominating  central  and 
western  India.  This  confederacy  was  finally  conquered  in 
a  war  which  lasted  from  1816  to  1818,  when  a  large  part  of 
its  territories  were  added  directly  to  the  English  possessions, 
and  other  parts  were  left  under  their  native  rulers  who,  how- 
ever, were  brought  effectively  under  English  control  by  being 
obliged  to  confonn  to  English  policy,  to  accept  English 
Residents  at  their  courts,  whose  advice  they  were  practically 
compelled  to  follow,  and  by  putting  their  native  armies  under 
British  direction.  Such  is  the  condition  of  many  of  them 
at  the  present  day. 

The  English  also  advanced  to  the  north  and  northwest, 
from  Bengal.  One  of  their  most  important  annexations 
was  that  of  the  Punjab,  an  immense  territory  on  the  Indus, 
taken  as  a  result  of  two  difficult  wars  (1845  to  1849),  and 
the  Oudh  province,  one  of  the  nchest  sections  of  India,  lying 
between  the  Punjab  and  Bengal,  annexed  in  1856. 

The  steady  march  of  English  conquest  aroused  a  bitter 
feeling  of  hostility  to  the  English,  which  came  to  a  head  in 
the  famous  Sepoy  Mutiny  of  1857,  Avhich  for  a  time  threat- 
ened the  complete  overthrow  of  the  British  in  northern  India. 
There  were  various  causes  of  this  insurrection:  the  bitter 
discontent  of  the  deposed  princes  and  their  adherents,  who 
sent  out  emissaries  to  stir  up  hatred  against  the  intruders ; 
the  fear  of  other  princes  that  their  turn  might  come;  the 
introduction  of  railways  and  telegraphs,  represented  by  the 
priests   as   an  attack  upon  their  religion;  rumors  that  the 


THE  MUTINY  IN  INDIA  621 

English  intended  to  force  Christianity  upon  the  people  and 
destroy  their  religion  and  civilization;  the  attempts  to 
stamp  out  the  custom  of  female  infanticide;  a  prophecy  of 
the  soothsayers  that  English  domination  was  destined  to 
end  on  the  hundredth  anniversary  of  its  beginning  at  the 
battle  of  Plassey  (1757). 

English  domination  rested  on  military  force,  and  in  the  The  Indian 
main  upon  the  native  Indian  soldiers.  There  were  in  India  ^  ^"^' 
in  1857  about  45,000  English  troops,  and  over  250,000 
native  soldiers,  the  Sepoys.  In  that  year  a  mutiny  broke 
out  among  the  Sepoys  of  the  Ganges  provinces  in  northern 
India.  The  immediate  occasion  was  the  introduction  of  a 
new  rifle,  or  rather  of  the  paper-covered  cartridges  for  it, 
which  were  lubricated,  it  was  alleged,  with  the  fat  of  cows 
and  pigs.  One  end  of  the  cartridges  had  to  be  bitten  by  the 
teeth  before  being  put  into  the  barrel.  This  outraged  the  re- 
ligious feelings  of  the  Hindus,  who  regarded  the  cow  as 
a  sacred  animal,  and  of  the  Mohammedans,  who  regarded 
the  pig  as  unclean,  the  lard  as  contaminating.  The  English 
tried  to  dispel  the  rumor  by  publishing  a  formula  of  the 
grease  used,  and  ordering  officers  to  assure  the  soldiers  that 
these  ingredients  were  not  employed,  but  their  efforts  were 
unavailing.  A  cavalry  regiment  refused  to  receive  the  new 
munitions,  some  of  its  members  were  sentenced  to  ten  years' 
imprisonment,  their  comrades  began  an  insurrection  to  save 
them,  and  the  insurrection  spread  swiftly.  The  native  sol- 
diery seized  Dellii,  the  ancient  capital  of  the  Moguls,  Luck- 
now,  Cawnpore,  and  other  places,  massacring  with  barbarous 
cruelty  large  numbers  of  men,  women,  and  children.  Shortly 
all  northern  India  seemed  lost. 

The  English  took  a  fearful  and  decisive  revenge.  Many 
of  the  Sepoys  remained  loyal,  European  troops  were  rushed 
to  the  scene  of  the  disturbance,  and  the  insurrection  was 
crushed.  Beside  themselves  with  rage  and  terrified  by  the 
narrowness  of  the  escape,  the  English  meted  out  ferocious 
punishment.     Hundreds  were  shot  in  cold  blood,  without  trial, 


522  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Change  in 
the  govern- 
ment  of 
India. 


The  vast 
population 
of  India. 


The 

population 
not  homo- 
genous. 


and  thousands  were  hanged  after  trials  that  were  a  travesty 
of  justice.  JNIany  were  fastened  to  the  mouths  of  cannon 
and  blown  to  pieces. 

Since  this  mutiny  fifty  years  ago  no  attempts  have  been 
made  to  overthrow  English  control.  One  important  con- 
sequence was  that  in  1858  the  government  of  India  was 
transferred  to  the  Crown  from  the  private  company  which 
had  conducted  it  for  a  century.  It  passed  under  the  direct 
authority  of  England.  In  1876,  as  we  have  seen,  India 
was  declared  an  empire,  and  Queen  Victoria  assumed  the 
title  Empress  of  India,  January  1,  1877.  This  fact  was  of- 
ficially announced  in  India  by  Lord  Lytton,  the  Viceroy,  to 
an  imposing  assembly  of  the  ruling  princes. 

An  empire  it  surely  is,  with  its  three  hundred  million  in- 
habitants. A  Viceroy  stands  at  the  head  of  the  government. 
There  is  a  Secretary  for  India  in  the  British  Ministry.  The 
government  is  largely  carried  on  by  the  highly  organized 
Civil  Service  of  India,  and  is  in  the  hands  of  about  eleven 
hundred  Englishmen.  About  220  millions  of  people  are 
under  the  direct  control  of  Great  Britain ;  about  67  millions 
live  in  native  states  under  native  rulers,  the  "  Protected 
Princes  of  India,"  of  whom  there  were,  a  few  years  ago, 
nearly  seven  hundred.  For  all  practical  purposes,  how- 
ever, these  princes  must  follow  the  advice  of  English  officials, 
or  Residents,  stationed  in  their  capitals. 

"  The  people  of  India,"  says  President  Lowell,  "  are  not 
a  nation,  but  a  conglomerate  of  many  different  races  and 
religions,  often  side  by  side  in  the  same  place,  yet  unmixed 
and  sharply  separate.  It  is  this,  as  Seeley  pointed  out  in 
his  '  Expansion  of  England,'  that  has  enabled  the  British  to 
conquer  and  hold  the  country.  If  the  inhabitants  could  act 
together,  and  were  agreed  in  wanting  independence,  they 
could  get  it.  In  short,  if  they  were  capable  of  national  self- 
government,  the  English  would  live  on  a  volcano,  and  their 
occupation  would  be  brief.  The  Mutiny  was  suppressed  be- 
cause it  was  not  universal.     The  Sikhs  helped  to  put  down 


Wait  Longiluof  frtm. 


ColIdnial  Possi^ssio^ 

^         of  tRe  T 

ElTlK)PE.iN  PQlV^RfS 
m  1815. 


BRITISH  NORTH  AMERICA  523 

the  Sepoys ;  and  so  long  as  large  sections  of  the  people  dis- 
trust one  another  more  than  they  do  the  English,  disaffection 
has  little  chance  of  achieving  any  notable  result."  ^ 

Not  only  has  England  completed  her  control  of  India  in  Annexation 
the  nineteenth  century,  but  she  has  added  countries  round  °     Burma 
about  India,  Burma  toward  the  east,  and,  toward  the  west,  saluchistaa 
Baluchistan,  a  part  of  which  has  been  annexed  outright,  and 
the  remainder  brought  under  a  protectorate.      She  has  also 
imposed  a  kind  of  protectorate  upon  Afghanistan,  as  a  re- 
sult of  two  Afghan  wars  (1839-42  and  1878-80). 

BRITISH  NORTH  AMERICA 

In  1815,  as  already  stated.  Great  Britain  possessed,  on  the 
continent  of  North  America,  six  colonies :  Upper  Canada, 
Lower  Canada,  New  Brunswick,  Nova  Scotia,  Prince  Edward 
Island,  and  Newfoundland ;  and  the  Hudson  Bay  Company's 
territories  stretched  to  the  north  and  northwest  with  unde- 
fined boundaries.  The  total  population  of  these  colonies  was 
about  460,000.  The  colonies  were  entirely  separate  from 
each  other.  Each  had  its  own  government,  and  its  relations 
were  not  with  the  others,  but  with  England.  The  oldest 
and  most  populous  was  Lower  Canada,  which  included  Mont- 
real and  Quebec  and  the  St.  Lawrence  valley.  It  was  the 
French  colony  conquered  by  England  in  1763.  Its  popula- 
tion was  French-speaking,  and  Roman  Catholic  in  religion. 

The  two  most  important  of  these  colonies  were  Lower  Upper  and 
Canada,  largely  French,  and  Upper  Canada,  entirely  Eng-  I-ower 
lish.  Each  had  received  a  constitution  in  1791,  modeled 
along  lines  familiar  to  Englishmen  at  home.  There  was 
a  Governor  appointed  by  the  monarch,  an  Executive  Council, 
appointed  by  the  same  authority  and  corresponding  to  the 
cabinet,  a  Legislative  Council,  likewise  appointed  by  the 
Cro\Mi  and  for  life,  intended  as  the  nearest  approach  to  the 
House  of  Lords  possible  in  a  frontier  country,  and  a  House 
of  Assembly,  the  members  of  which  were  elected  by  the  people. 
*  Lowell,  The  Government  of  England,  II,  424-425. 


524  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Constitu- 
tional 
difficulties 
in  Upper 
Canada. 


In  Lower 

Canada. 


Neither  in  Upper  nor  in  Lower  Canada  did  the  constitu- 
tion woi'k  well.  In  Upper  Canada  there  were  perpetual 
conflicts  between  the  two  Houses  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
Governor  on  the  other.  The  Governor  could  virtually  veto 
the  actions  of  the  legislature,  and  considered  himself  re- 
sponsible primarily  to  the  English  Government,  not  to  the 
people  of  the  province.  He  consulted  the  Executive  Coun- 
cil onl^^  infrequently,  and  followed  its  opinion  only  when  he 
chose  to.  What  the  two  Houses  were  constantly  struggling 
for  was  the  creation  of  an  executive,  responsible,  not  to 
the  monarch  in  England,  but  to  themselves,  and  to  this 
end  they  wished  to  make  the  Executive  Council  resemble 
the  ministry  in  England.  This  struggle  between  executive 
and  legislature  was  the  fundamental  problem  in  this  prov- 
ince, which  had,  however,  other  grievances,  such  as  the  prac- 
tical monopoly  in  office-holding  which  a  few  families  had 
succeeded  in  acquiring. 

In  Lower  or  French  Canada  there  was  also  a  constitu- 
tional struggle,  embittered  by  race  animosity.  The  French, 
overtt'lielmingly  predominant  in  population,  controlled  only 
the  House  of  Assembly,  while  the  three  other  branches  of 
the  Government,  the  Governor,  Executive  Council,  and  Legis- 
lative Council,  all  appointive  and  not  elective,  were  con- 
trolled by  the  English  element.  The  chief  struggle  in  this 
colony  was  between  the  Assembly,  controlled  by  the  French, 
and  the  Legislative  Council,  controlled  by  the  English.  The 
French  demanded  that  the  Legislative  Council  be  made 
elective,  expecting,  if  that  were  done,  to  have  the  majority 
in  it.  They  demanded  also  that  the  executive,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Governor,  be  made  responsible  to  the  legis- 
lature. The  French,  unable  to  get  control  of  any  branch 
of  the  government  except  the  Assembly,  resolved  to  use  this 
to  force  the  concessions  they  desired.  They  refused  to 
make  the  appropriations  necessary  for  the  running  of  the 
government.  Year  after  year,  from  1832  on,  no  moneys 
were  voted  for  the  payment  of  judges  and  civil  officers.     The 


THE  DURHAM  MISSION  525 

struggle   was    similar   to    that   witnessed    in    the   eighteenth 
century  in  many  of  the  thirteen  colonies  to  the  south. 

The  conflict  was  between  the  representative  and  the  non-  The 
representative   parts    of   the   government.       It   was    funda-       . 
mentally   a  constitutional  question.       The  colonies   did  not  self-govern- 
possess   complete  legislative  power,  as   the  upper  chamber,  ment. 
non-elective,    could   block   the   lower   chamber,    representing 
the  people.     Nor  had  the  legislature,  as  a  whole,  what  it  had 
in   England — control    over   the   executive.       "  The   colonies 
have    the    mockeries,    the    shadows    of    English    institutions, 
not  the  realities ;  the  names,  not  the  substances,"  said  Lord 
Durham   later.       The   principle    which   makes    the    English 
system   of  government   workable,   responsibility    of   the   ex- 
ecutive to  the  legislature,  was  lacking.     The  people  had  no 
efficient  control  of  their  rulers.      England  had  not  yet  solved 
the  problem  of  colonial  government. 

In  1837  disaff'ection  had  reached  such  a  point  that  revolu-  The 

tionarv  movements  broke  out  in  both  colonies.   These  were  eas-  rebellion  of 

1837 
ily  suppressed  by  the  Canadian  authorities  without  help  from 

England,  but  the  grievances  of  the  colonists  still  remained. 

The    English    Government,    thoroughly    alarmed    at    the  The  Durham 
danger  of  the  loss  of  another  empire,  adopted  the  part  of  Mission, 
discretion  and  sent  out  to  Canada  a  commissioner  to  study 
the  grievances  of  the  colonists.     The  man  chosen  was  Lord 
Durham,  whose  part  in  the  reform  of  1832  had  been  brilliant. 
Durham  was  in  Canada  five  months.     His  acts  were  vehe- 
mently   criticised   in    Parliament,    the    ministry,    which    had 
appealed  to  him  to  undertake  the  mission,  did  not  loyally 
support  him,  and  he  shortly  returned  to  England,  humiliated 
and  in  official  disgrace,  the  victim  of  the  party  and  personal 
politics  of  England.     He  had  "  marred  a  career,  but  made  a  lord 
nation."     The  Durham  Report,  submitted  to  Parliament  on  Durham's 
his  return,  entitles  him  to  the  rank  of  the  greatest  colonial  -^^P^"' 
statesman  in  British  history.     It  contained  a  full  description 
of  the  situation  in  Canada,  and  proposed  sweeping  changes 
in  colonial  policy. 


526  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The 

executive 
irrespon- 
sible. 


Durham 
proposes 
ministerial 
responsibil- 
ity. 


Examining  the  history  of  the  six  provinces,  Lord  Dur- 
ham declared  "  that  the  natural  state  of  government  in 
all  these  colonies  is  that  of  collision  between  the  executive 
and  the  representative  body."  He  pointed  out  that  the 
executive  was  irresponsible,  and  asked  how  long  Englishmen 
at  home  would  tolerate  a  ministry  not  in  sympathy  with 
the  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Such  ministries 
were  the  common  occurrence  in  Canada.  "  It  is  difficult," 
he  declared,  "  to  understand  how  any  English  statesman 
could  have  imagined  that  representative  and  irresponsible 
government  could  be  successfully  combined."  He  also  de- 
clared that  the  situation  in  Canada  "  was  the  unavoidable 
result  of  a  system  which  stinted  the  popular  branch  of  the 
legislature  of  the  necessary  privileges  of  a  representative 
body."  The  Assembly  in  Lower  Canada  had  been  con- 
ducting "  a  constant  warfare  with  the  executive,  for  the 
purpose  of  obtaining  the  powers  inherent  in  a  representative 
body  by  the  very  nature  of  representative  government." 

Fox  had  said  that  "  the  only  method  of  retaining  distant 
colonies  with  advantage,  is  to  enable  them  to  govern  them- 
selves." This  was  what  Lord  Durham  now  proposed,  namely, 
the  introduction  of  complete  ministerial  responsibility  to  the 
popular  chamber.  "  The  Crown  must  consent  to  carry  on 
the  government  by  means  of  those  in  whom  the  represent- 
ative members  have  confidence."  "  That  sounds  like  a  tru- 
ism now,"  says  Lord  Durham's  biographer,  "  but  it  was  the 
first  recognition  by  a  responsible  statesman  of  the  principle 
of  self-government  in  the  colonies." 

No  wonder  then  that  this  Report  has  been  called  "  the 
Magna  Chart  a  of  the  Colonies,"  the  "  most  valuable  docu- 
ment in  the  English  language  on  the  subject  of  colonial 
policy,"  the  "  text  book  of  every  advocate  of  colonial  free- 
dom in  all  parts  of  the  globe,"  that  it  is  asserted  to  have 
"  broadened  once  for  all  the  lines  of  constructive  statesman- 
ship in  all  that  relates  to  the  colonial  policy  of  England." 
'Reid,  Life  and  Letters  of  Lord  Durham,  II,  314, 


MINISTERIAL  RESPONSIBILITY  527 

Lord  Durham  believed  also  in  a  federal  union  of  all  the  Durham 
British  colonies  of  North  America  but,  recognizing  that  the 
idea  was  premature,  he  recommended  the  union  of  Upper 
and  Lower  Canada  into  a  single  colony  with  a  single  govern- 
ment. This  he  also  thought  would  have  the  advantage  of 
putting  the  English,  the  more  progressive  element,  in  a 
majority  in  the  united  colony. 

Durham's  recommendations  were  not  immediately  followed 
as  they  seemed  to  many  Englishmen  to  render  the  colonies 
independent.  In  1840,  however,  a  bill  was  passed  carrying 
out  the  latter  suggestion  of  a  fusion  of  Ontario  and  Quebec, 
Upper  and  Lower  Canada,  under  a  single  government,  the 
Assembly  to  have  larger  powers  than  previously.  But  the 
essential  feature  of  Durham's  report,  ministerial  responsi- 
bility, was  not  provided  for  in  the  law,  and,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  during  the  next  seven  years  the  Governors  did  not  act 

upon  the  principle   that  the  Executive   Council  was   to   do  „.  .  ^    .  , 

^  .      .  .  .       .  Ministerial 

as  the  majority  of  the  Assembly  wished.      This  vital  and,  as  responsibil- 

far  as  the  colonies  were  concerned,  revolutionary  principle  ity  finally 
was  adopted  in  18-i7  by  Lord  Elgin,  the  Governor  of  Can-  introduced, 
ada  and  the  son-in-law  of  Lord  Durham,  who  chose  as 
members  of  the  Executive  Council  members  of  the  French 
party  then  in  majority  in  the  Assembly,  an  act  very  un- 
popular with  the  English,  and  leading  to  a  riot  in  which  the 
mob  attacked  the  Governor's  carriage  and  set  fire  to  the 
Parliament  building.  Elgin  adhered  to  his  resolution,  how- 
ever, and  the  principle  of  ministerial  responsibility  was  thus 
introduced,  and  has  since  been  constantly  maintained.  It  was 
custom,  however,  not  law.  It  spread  rapidly  to  the  other 
colonies  of  Great  Britain,  which  were  chiefly  of  English 
stock  and  were  therefore  considered  capable  of  self-govern- 
ment. Responsible  government  was  granted  to  Nova  Scotia 
and  New  Brunswick  in  1848,  to  Prince  Edward  Island  in 
1851,  to  New  Zealand  in  1854,  and  within  the  next  two  years 
to  New  South  Wales,  Victoria,  Tasmania,  South  Australia, 
and  Newfoundland;  to  Queensland  in  1859;  to  British  Co- 


528  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


of  Canada, 
1867. 


lumbia  in  1871;  to  Cape  Colony  in  1872;  to  Western  Aus- 
tralia in  1890,  and  Natal  in  1893;  to  Transvaal  Colony  in 
1906,  and  Orange  River  Colony  in  1907. 

DOMINION  OF  CANADA 

The  Act  of  1840,  based  largely  upon  Durham's  Report, 
had  united  Upper  and  Lower  Canada,  or  Ontario  and 
Quebec,  into  one  colony,  had  swept  away  the  two  legislatures 
and  established  a  single  one  for  the  united  colony.  Tliis 
union  of  two  colonies  so  very  dissimilar,  the  one  English, 
the  other  largely  French,  did  not  work  smoothly,  and  there 
was  a  strong  feeling  that  each  part  should  have  a  legislature 
of  its  own  for  purely  local  purposes. 
Founding  Lord  Durham  had   also   suggested   federation   of   all  the 

0  ominion  j,j^qjv^]^  American  colonies  as  a  final  settlement.  Various 
reasons  prevented  this  for  many  years,  among  others  the 
very  defective  means  of  communication,  but  the  desire  for 
federation  gradually  increased. 

The  growth  of  population,  the  improvement  of  ways  of 
communication  by  the  building  of  railroads,  the  example 
of  the  successful  federation  across  the  border  to  the  south, 
and  the  possible  danger  of  attack  from  that  side,  as  sug- 
gested by  the  Fenian  movement  and  the  Alabama  conten- 
tions, all  caused  Canadian  public  opinion  to  express  itself 
in  favor  of  union.  The  English  Parliament  was  therefore 
merely  voicing  Canadian  sentiment  when  in  1867  it  passed 
the  British  North  America  Act.  Indeed,  that  act  had  been 
drawn  up  in  Canada  and  was  ratified  by  the  English  Par- 
liament without  change.  By  it  Upper  and  Lower  Canada, 
Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick  were  joined  into  a  con- 
federation called  the  Dominion  of  Canada.  There  was  to  be 
a  central  or  federal  parliament  sitting  in  Ottawa.  There 
were  also  to  be  local  or  provincial  legislatures  in  each  prov- 
ince to  legislate  for  local  affairs.  Questions  affecting  the 
whole  Dominion  were  reserved  for  the  Dominion  Parliament. 

The  central  or  Dominion  Parliament  was  to  consist  of  a 


British 
North 
America 
Act. 


THE  DOMINION  OF  CANADA  629 

Senate  and  a  House  of  Commons.     The  Senate  was  to  be  The 

composed    of   seventy   members    nominated    for   life   bv   the  "°™^"^°^ 

Pd,rli3,ni6iit 
Governor-General,  himself  appointed  by  the  monarch,  and 

representing  the  Crown.  The  House  of  Commons  was  to  be 
elected  by  the  people.  In  some  respects  the  example  of  the 
English  Government  was  followed  in  the  constitution.  In 
others  that  of  the  United  States.  This  federation  differs 
from  ours  in  one  very  important  particular.  By  our  con- 
stitution certain  definite  powers  are  granted  the  federal  gov- 
ernment. All  others  are  vested  either  in  the  states  or  the 
people  of  the  states.  In  the  Dominion  certain  powers  are 
granted  to  the  provinces.  All  others  are  vested  in  the  federal 
government. 

Though  the   Dominion   began   with   only    four   provinces  Growth  of 
provision   was   made   for  the  possible   admission   of   others.  *^®  Domin- 
Manitoba  was  admitted  in  1870,  British  Columbia  in  1871, 
Prince  Edward  Island  in  1873. 

In  1846,  by  the  settlement  of  the  Oregon  dispute,  the 
line  dividing  the  English  possessions  from  the  United  States 
was  extended  to  the  Pacific  Ocean,  and  in  1869  the  Dominion 
acquired  by  purchase  (£300,000)  the  vast  territories  belong- 
ing to  the  Hudson  Bay  Company,  out  of  which  the  great 
provinces  of  Alberta  and  Saskatchewan  have  been  carved 
and  admitted  into  the  union  (1905).  The  Dominion  now 
includes  all  of  British  North  America  except  the  island  of 
Newfoundland,  which  has  steadily  refused  to  join.  It  thus 
extends  from  ocean  to  ocean.  Except  for  the  fact  that  she 
receives  a  Governor  General  from  England  and  that  she 
possesses  no  treaty  powers,  Canada  is  practically  independent. 
She  manages  her  own  affairs,  and  even  imposes  tariffs  which 
are  disadvantageous  to  the  mother  country.  That  she  has 
imperial  as  well  as  local  patriotism,  however,  was  shown  strik- 
ingly in  her  support  of  England  in  the  recent  South  African 
war.  She  sent  Canadian  regiments  thither  at  her  own  ex- 
pense to  co-operate  in  an  enterprise  not  closely  connected 
with  her  own  fortunes. 


530  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The 

Canadian 
Pacific 
Railway. 


The  founding  of  the  Canadian  union  in  1867  rendered 
possible  the  construction  of  a  great  transcontinental  railwa}^, 
the  Canadian  Pacific,  built  between  1881  and  1885.  This 
has  in  turn  reacted  upon  the  Dominion  binding  the  different 
provinces  together,  and  contributing  to  the  remarkable  de- 
velopment of  the  west.  At  present  another  transcontinental 
railway  is  being  built  farther  to  the  north.  Canada  is  con- 
nected by  steamship  lines  with  Europe  and  with  Japan  and 
Australia.  Her  population  has  increased  from  less  than 
five  hundred  thousand  in  1815  to  more  than  five  million. 
Her  prosperity  has  grown  immensely,  and  her  economic 
life  is  becoming  more  varied.  Largely  an  agricultural  and 
timber  producing  country,  manufactures  are  now  developing 
under  the  stimulus  of  protective  tariffs,  and  her  vast  mineral 
resources  are  in  process  of  rapid  development. 


Early 
explora- 
tions. 


AUSTRALIA 

An  eminent  English  historian.  Sir  Spencer  Walpole,  has 
written  that  "  the  greatest  fact  in  the  history  of  England 
is  that  she  is  the  mother  of  the  United  States.  It  may  be 
similarly  added,  that  the  greatest  fact  in  the  history  of  the 
nineteenth  century  is  the  foundation  of  a  new  Britain — which 
may  eventually  prove  a  greater  Britain — in  the  Southern 
Hemisphere."  ^ 

Whether  Australia  will  prove  a  greater  Britain  or  not, 
only  the  future  can  show,  but  the  opening  of  the  twentieth 
century  sees  a  neAV  "  colonial  nation  "  in  existence,  prosper- 
ous, energetic,  ambitious.  The  creation  of  that  new  empire 
has  been  the  work  of  the  nineteenth  century,  an  empire  nearly 
as  extensive  territorially  as  the  United  States  or  Canada, 
about  three-fourths  as  large  as  Europe,  and  inhabited  almost 
entirely  by  a  population  of  English  descent. 

No  systematic  exploration  of  this  southern  continent. 
Terra  Australis,  was  undertaken  until  toward  the  close  of 


^History  of   England,   VI,  336. 


AUSTRALIAN  COLONIZATION  531 

the  eighteenth  century,  but  certain  parts  had  been  sighted 
or  traced  much  earher  by  Spanish,  Portuguese,  and  particu- 
larly by  Dutch  navigators.  Among  the  last,  Tasman  is  to  be 
mentioned,  who  in  1642  explored  the  southeastern  portion, 
though  he  did  not  discover  that  the  land  which  was  later 
to  bear  his  name  was  an  island,  a  fact  not  known,  indeeed, 
for  a  century  and  a  half.  He  discovered  the  islands  to  the 
east  of  Australia,  and  gave  to  them  a  Dutch  name,  New 
Zealand.  The  Dutch  called  the  Terra  Aus trails  New  Hol- 
land, claiming  it  by  right  of  discovery.  But  they  made  no 
attempt  to  occupy  it.  The  attention  of  the  English  was  The  voyages 
first  directed  thither  by  the  famous  Captain  Cook,  who  made  o^  Captain 
three  voyages  to  this  region  between  1768  and  1779.  Cook 
sailed  around  New  Zealand,  and  then  along  the  eastern  coast 
of  this  New  Holland.  He  put  into  a  certain  harbor,  which 
was  forthwith  named  Botany  Bay,  so  varied  was  the  vegeta- 
tion on  the  shores.  Sailing  up  the  eastern  coast,  he  claimed 
it  all  for  George  III,  and  called  it  New  South  Wales  because 
it  reminded  him  of  the  Welsh  coast.  Seventeen  years,  how- 
ever, went  by  before  any  settlement  was  made. 

As  Australia  was  remote,  it  was  considered  by  English  a  convict 
statesmen  a  good  place  to  which  to  send  criminals,  and  it  colony, 
was  as  a  convict  colony  that  the  new  empire  began.  The 
first  expedition  for  the  colonization  of  the  country  sailed  from 
England  in  May  1787  with  750  convicts  on  board,  and 
reached  Botany  Bay  in  January  1788.  Here  the  first 
settlement  was  made,  and  to  it  was  given  the  name  of  the 
colonial  secretary  of  the  day,  Sydney.  For  many  years 
fresh  cargoes  of  convicts  were  sent  out  who,  on  the  expira^ 
tion  of  their  sentences,  received  lands.  Free  settlers  came 
too,  led  to  emigrate  by  various  periods  of  economic  de- 
pression at  home,  by  promises  of  land  and  food,  and  by  an 
increasing  knowledge  of  the  adaptability  of  the  new  con- 
tinent to  agriculture,  and  particularly  to  sheep  raising.  By 
1820  the  population  was  not  far  from  40,000.  During  the 
first  thirty  years  the  government  was  military  in  character. 


63^  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Abandon- 
ment of 
this 
system. 


The 

discovery 
of  gold. 


The  Six 

Australian 

Colonies. 


Eeasons  for 

their 

federation. 


The  free  settlers  were  strongly  opposed  to  having  Aus- 
tralica  regarded  as  a  prison  for  English  convicts.  They  were 
not  a  desirable  class  of  immigrants,  and  their  presence  tended 
to  prevent  men  from  coming  whose  immigration  would  have 
been  desirable.  As  Englishmen  came  to  see  that  this  was 
an  expensive  and  ineffective  way  of  punishing  criminals, 
and  as  the  free  men  in  Australia  vehemently  denounced  the 
custom  as  a  stigma  upon  their  adopted  land,  it  was  finally 
abolished  in  New  South  Wales  in  1840.  The  custom  lin- 
gered on,  however,  in  other  colonies,  and  did  not  entirely 
disappear  until  1853.  This  question  of  the  transportation 
of  criminals  was  one  of  the  important  questions  in  Australia 
during  the  first  part  of  its  history. 

Australia  had  thus  far  been  mainly  a  pastoral  country, 
producing  wool  and  hides.  But,  in  1851  and  1852,  rich 
deposits  of  gold  were  found,  rivaled  only  by  those  discovered 
a  little  earlier  in  California.  A  tremendous  immigration 
ensued.  The  population  of  the  colony  of  Victoria  (cut  off 
from  New  South  Wales)  increased  from  70,000  to  more  than 
800,000  in  five  years.  Australia  has  ever  since  remained 
one  of  the  great  gold  producing  countries  of  the  world. 

Thus  there  gradually  grew  up  six  colonies.  New  South 
Wales,  Queensland,  Victoria,  South  Australia,  Western  Aus- 
tralia, and  the  neighboring  island  of  Tasmania.  These  were 
gradually  invested  with  self-government,  parliaments  and 
responsible  ministries  in  the  fashion  worked  out  in  Canada. 
The  population  increased  steadily,  and  by  the  end  of  the 
century  numbered  about  four  million. 

The  great  political  event  in  the  history  of  these  colonies 
was  their  union  into  a  confederation  at  the  close  of  the  cen- 
tury. Up  to  that  time  the  colonies  had  been  legally  un- 
connected with  each  other,  and  their  only  form  of  union 
was  the  loose  one  under  the  British  Crown.  For  a  long 
time  there  was  discussion  as  to  the  advisability  of  binding 
them  more  closely  together.  Various  reasons  contributed  to 
con^ance  the  Australians   of  the  advantages   of  federation. 


THE  AUSTRALIAN  FEDERATION  533 

They  have  been  summarized  by  Mr.  Bryce  as  follows :  "  the 
gain  to  trade  and  the  general  convenience  to  be  expected  from 
abolishing  the  tariffs  established  on  the  frontiers  of  each  col- 
ony, the  need  for  a  common  system  of  military  defense,  the  ad- 
vantages of  a  common  legislation  for  the  regulation  of  rail- 
ways and  the  fixing  of  railway  rates,  the  advantages  of  a 
common  control  of  the  larger  rivers  for  the  purposes  both 
of  navigation  and  of  irrigation,  the  need  for  uniform  legis- 
lation on  a  number  of  commercial  and  industrial  topics, 
the  importance  of  finding  an  authority  competent  to  provide 
for  old  age  pensions  and  for  the  settlement  of  labor  disputes 
all  over  the  country,  the  need  for  uniform  provisions  against 
the  entrance  of  colored  races  (especially  Chinese,  Malays,  and 
Indian  coolies),  the  stimulus  to  be  given  to  industry  and  trade 
by  substituting  one  great  community  for  six  smaller  ones."  * 
Moreover,  the  desire  for  nationality,  which  has  accom- 
plished such  remarkable  changes  in  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  Creation 

century,  was   also   active   here.     An   Australian   patriotism 

11  A  T  1-1  1.1-  i       Australian 

had  grown  up.     Australians  desired  to  make  their  country  common- 

the  dominant  authority  in  the  Southern  Hemisphere.     They  wealth, 
longed  for  a  larger  outlook  than  that  given  by  the  life  of 
the  separate  colonies,  and  thus  both  reason  and  sentiment 
combined  toward  the  same  end,  a  close  union,  the  creation 
of  another  "  colonial  nation." 

Union  was  finally  achieved  after  ten  years  of  earnest  dis- 
cussion (1890-1900).  The  various  experiments  in  federation 
were  carefully  studied,  particularly  the  constitutions  of  the 
United  States  and  Canada.  The  draft  of  the  constitution  was 
worked  over  by  several  conventions,  by  the  ministers  and  the 
governments  of  the  various  colonies,  and  was  finally  submitted 
to  the  people  for  ratification.  Ratification  being  secured, 
the  constitution  was  then  passed  through  the  British  Parlia- 
ment under  the  title  of  "  The  Commonwealth  of  Australia 
Constitution  Act"  (1900).  The  constitution  was  the  work  of 
the  Australians.  The  part  taken  by  England  was  simply  one 
^  Bryce,  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  I,  478-479. 


58i  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The 

Federal 
Parliament. 


of  acceptance.  Though  Parliament  made  certain  sugges- 
tions of  detail,  it  did  not  insist  upon  them  in  the  case  of 
Australian    opposition. 

The  constitution  established  a  federation  consisting  of  the 
six  colonies  which  were  henceforth  to  be  called  states,  not 
provinces,  as  in  the  case  of  Canada.  It  created  a  federal 
Parliament  of  two  houses,  a  Senate  consisting  of  six  senators 
from  each  state,  and  a  House  of  Representatives  apportioned 
among  the  several  states  according  to  population.  The 
powers  given  to  the  Federal  Government  were  carefully  de- 
fined.    The  new  system  was  inaugurated  January  1,  1901/ 


NEW  ZEALAND 


Nevr 
Zealand. 


Not  included  in  the  new  commonwealth  Is  an  important 
group  of  islands  of  Australasia  called  New  Zealand,  situated 
1,200  miles  east  of  Australia.  England  began  to  have  some 
connection  with  these  islands  shortly  after  1815,  but  It  was 
not  until  1839  that  they  were  formally  annexed  to  the  British 
Empire.  In  ISSl?  New  Zealand  was  given  responsible  gov- 
ernment, and  in  1865  was  entirely  separated  from  New  South 
Wales  and  made  a  separate  colony.  Emigration  was  method- 
ically encouraged.  New  Zealand  was  never  a  convict  colony. 
Population  increased  and  It  gradually  became  the  most  demo- 
cratic colony  of  the  Empire.  In  1907  the  designation  of 
the  colony  was  changed  to  the  Dominion  of  New  Zealand. 

New  Zealand  consists  of  two  main  islands  with  many 
smaller  ones.  It  Is  about  a  fourth  larger  than  Great  Britain 
and  has  a  population  of  about  900,000,  of  whom  about 
47,000  are  aborigines,  the  Maoris.  Its  capital  Is  Welling- 
ton, with  a  population  of  about  60,000.     Auckland  is  an- 

'  A  valuable  description  of  this  constitution  is  to  be  found  in  Bryce, 
Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence,  "  The  Australian  Commonwealth." 
Abstract  of  this  in  Beard,  Intro,  to  Eng.  Hist.,  pp.  645-662.  See  also 
Bright,  Hist,  of  Eng.,  V,  197-199.  The  constitution  itself  may  be  found 
in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions.  On  inauguration  of  the  new  govern- 
ment see  Annual  Register  1901,  444-455. 


RECENT  LEGISLATION  OF  NEW  ZEALAND      535 

other  important  city.  New  Zealand  is  an  agricultural  and 
grazing  country,  and  also  possesses  rich  mineral  deposits, 
including  gold. 

New  Zealand  is  of  great  interest  to  the  world  of  to-day 
because  of  its  experiments  in  advanced  social  reform,  legisla- 
tion concerning  labor  and  capital,  landowning  and  commerce. 
State  control  has  been  extended  over  more  branches  of  in- 
dustry than  has  been  the  case  In  any  other  country. 

The  Government  owns  and  operates  the  railways.^     The  Advanced 

roads  are  run,  not  for  profit,  but  for  service  to  the  people.  ,     .  ,  .. 

'  ^  '  IT     r       legislation. 

As  rapidly  as  profits  exceed  three  per  cent,  passenger  and 
freight  rates  are  reduced.  Comprehensive  and  successful 
attempts  are  made  by  very  low  rates  to  induce  the  people 
in  congested  districts  to  live  in  the  country.  Workmen  going 
in  and  out  travel  about  three  miles  for  a  cent.  Children  in 
the  primary  grades  in  schools  are  carried  free,  and  those 
in  higher  grades  at  very  low  fares. 

The  Government  also  owns  and  operates  the  telegraphs 
and  telephones  and  conducts  postal  savings  banks.  Life  in- 
surance is  largely  in  its  hands.  It  has  a  fire  and  accident 
insurance  department.  In  1903  it  began  the  operation  of 
some  state  coal  mines.  Its  land  legislation  is  remarkable. 
Its  main  purpose  is  to  prevent  the  land  from  being  monopo- 
lized by  a  few,  and  to  enable  the  people  to  become  land- 
holders. In  1892  progressive  taxation  on  the  large  estates 
was  adopted,  and  in  1896  the  sale  of  such  estates  to  the  Gov- 
ernment was  made  compulsory,  and  thus  extensive  areas  have 
come  under  government  ownership.  The  State  transfers 
them  under  various  forms  of  tenure  to  the  landless  and 
working  classes.  The  system  of  taxation,  based  on  the  System  of 
principle  of  graduation,  higher  rates  for  larger  incomes,  taxation, 
properties,  and  inheritances,  is  designed  to  break  up  or 
prevent  monopoly  and  to  favor  the  small  proprietor  or 
producer. 

^  In  1908  the  Government  owned  2,474  miles.  There  were  113  miles 
of  private  lines. 


536  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Old  Age 
Pensions. 


England 
acquires 
Cape 
Colony. 


In  industrial  and  labor  legislation  New  Zealand  has  also 
made  radical  experiments.  Arbitration  in  labor  disputes  is 
compulsory  if  either  side  invokes  it,  and  the  decision  is 
binding.  Factory  laws  are  stringent,  aiming  particularly 
at  the  protection  of  women,  the  elimination  of  "  sweating." 
In  stores  the  Saturday  half  holiday  is  universal.  The  Gov- 
ernment has  a  Labor  Department  whose  head  is  a  member 
of  the  Cabinet.  Its  first  duty  is  to  find  work  for  the  un- 
employed, and  its  great  effort  is  to  get  the  people  out  of 
the  cities  into  the  country.  There  is  an  Old  Age  Pension 
Law,  enacted  in  1898  and  amended  in  1905,  providing  pen- 
sions of  about  a  hundred  and  twenty-five  dollars  for  all  men 
and  women  after  the  age  of  sixty-five  whose  income  is  less 
than  five  dollars  a  week. 

All  this  governmental  activity  rests  on  a  democratic  basis. 
There  are  no  property  qualifications  for  voting,  and  women 
have  the  suffrage  as  well  as  men.  The  referendum  has  been 
adopted. 

The  more  advanced  parties  demand  a  further  extension 
in  the  line  of  social  reform ;  the  nationalization  of  lands  and 
mines,  of  marine  and  coastal  and  intercolonial  services ; 
state  clothing  and  boot  factories,  flour  and  woolen  mills, 
bakeries,  iron-works,  and  ship  building  yards.  The  Austra- 
lian colony  of  Victoria  has  enacted  much  legislation  re- 
sembling that  described  in  the  case  of  New  Zealand. 

BRITISH  SOUTH  AFRICA 

As  an  incident  in  the  wars  against  France  and  her  ally 
and  dependent,  Holland,  England  seized  the  Dutch  possession 
in  South  Africa,  Cape  Colony.  This  colony  she  retained  in 
1814,  together  with  certain  Dutch  possessions  in  South  Amer- 
ica, paying  six  millions  pounds  as  compensation.  Tliis  was 
the  beginning  of  English  expansion  into  Africa,  which  was 
to  attain  remarkable  proportions  before  the  close  of  the 
century.  This  Dutch  colony  had  been  founded  as  early  as 
1652  as   a  port  of  call  for  Dutch  ships  trading  with  the 


CAPE  COLONY  537 

Orient.  Immigrants  came  from  Holland,  and  after  the  revo- 
cation of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  under  Louis  XIV,  many 
Huguenots  joined  them.  These  Frenchmen  v/ere  gradually 
completely  absorbed  in  the  Dutch  population,  losing  all  dis- 
tinguishing characteristics.  England  kept  the  colony  in 
1814  for  the  same  purpose  that  the  Dutch  had  founded  it,  as 
a  port  of  call,  for  English  commerce  with  India  went  by  this 
route,  there  being  then  no  Suez  canal.  The  population  at 
the  time  she  took  possession  consisted  of  about  27,000  people 
of  European  descent,  mostly  Dutch,  and  of  about  30,000 
African  and  Malay  slaves  owned  by  the  Dutch,  and  about 
17,000  Hottentots.  Immigration  of  Englishmen  began  forth- 
with. 

Friction  between  the  Dutch  (called  Boers,  i.e.,  peasants),  Friction 
and  the  English  was  not  slow  in  developing.  The  forms  of 
local  goveniment  to  which  the  Boers  were  accustomed  were 
abolished  and  new  ones  established.  English  was  made  the 
sole  language  used  in  the  courts.  The  Boers,  irritated  by 
these  measures,  were  rendered  indignant  by  the  abolition  of 
slavery  in  1834.  They  did  not  consider  slavery  wrong. 
Moreover,  they  felt  defrauded  of  their  property  as  the  com- 
pensation given  was  inadequate — about  three  million  pounds 
— little  more  than  a  third  of  what  they  considered  their 
slaves  were  worth.  Even  that  was  made  payable  in  London, 
a  device  which  enabled  London  bankers  to  get  a  good  share. 
For  all  the  abolition  of  slavery  meant  a  loss  of  property,  for 
many  a  total  loss. 

The  Boers  resolved  to  leave  the  colony   and  to  settle  in 

the  interior,  where  they  could  live  unmolested  by  the  intruders. 

This  migration  or  Great  Trek  began  in  1836,  and  continued  The  Great 

Trek* 
for  several  years.     About  10,000  Boers  thus  withdrew  from 

Cape  Colony.     Rude  carts  drawn  by  several  pairs  of  oxen 

transported    their    families    and    their    possessions    into    the 

wilderness.     Some  went  northeastward  and  settled  in  Natal 

only  to  find  that  they  were  not,  for  their  pains,  to  be  free 

from  English  control.     In  1842  the  English  sent  troops  into 


538  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Founding 
of  the 
Transvaal. 


The 

Transvaal 
annexed  to 
Great 
Britain. 


Natal,  and  in  the  following  year  proclaimed  it  a  colony. 
Many  of  the  Boers  trekked  again  to  join  their  fellow  Boers 
who,  while  they  were  going  into  Natal,  had  gone  into  the 
Orange  River  country.  Such  were  the  beginnings  of  the 
Orange  Free  State,  whose  capital  was  Bloemfontein.  But 
again  they  were  followed.  The  English,  in  1848,  declared 
this  region  a  part  of  the  British  Empire,  under  the  name  of 
the  Orange  River  Sovereignty.  Many  of  the  Orange  River 
Boers,  refusing  to  live  under  the  British  flag,  trekked  again, 
joining  those  who,  in  the  earlier  migration,  had  gone  farther 
north  across  the  Vaal,  founding  a  state  destined  to  become 
famous  as  the  Transvaal  or  South  African  Republic,  and 
where  it  seemed  for  many  years  they  would  be  permitted  to 
enjoy  the  independence  which  they  had  made  such  efforts 
to  secure. 

For,  in  1852,  Great  Britain,  apparently  considering  the 
Transvaal  not  worth  annexing,  formally  recognized  its  in- 
dependence, its  entire  right  to  manage  its  own  affairs,  by  a 
treaty,  the  Sand  River  Convention,  and  two  years  later  it 
abandoned  the  Orange  River  Sovereignty,  by  the  Convention 
of  Bloemfontein.  From  this  time  date  the  two  Boer  repub- 
lics of  South  Africa,  the  Orange  Free  State  and  the  Trans- 
vaal or  South  African  Republic. 

From  1854  to  1899  the  Orange  Free  State  pursued  its 
peaceful  career  unmolested,  its  independence  not  infringed 
upon.  The  Transvaal,  too,  was  left  in  the  splendid  isolation 
it  so  much  enjoyed,  but  not  for  so  long  a  time,  for  in  1877 
England,  under  Lord  Beaconsfield's  administration,  abruptly 
declared  it  annexed  to  the  British  Empire,  on  the  ground 
that  its  independence  was  a  menace  to  the  peace  of  England's 
other  South  African  possessions,  as  the  Boers  were  fre- 
quently involved  in  wars  with  the  natives  who,  once  aroused, 
constituted  a  general  menace.  A  delegation  of  Boers  was 
sent  to  England  to  protest  and  demand  the  restoration  of 
their  independence.  One  of  the  delegates  was  Paul  Kruger, 
who,  as  a  boy  of  ten,  had  followed  his  father's  cattle  as  they 


MAJUBA  HILL  539 

were  driven  across  the  prairie  in  the  Great  Trek  of  1836. 
The  delegation  was  told  in  London  by  the  British  ministry 
that  the  annexation  was  irrevocable.  The  Boers'  hatred  of 
the  English  naturally  grew  more  intense,  and  they  fell  to 
meditating  plans  for  the  future. 

But  in  1880  Lord  Beaconsfield  was  overthrown  and  Mr. 
Gladstone  came  into  power.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  denounced 
the  annexation,  and  was  convinced  that  a  mistake  had  been 
made  which  must  be  rectified.  He  was  negotiating  with  the 
Boer  leaders,  hoping  to  reach,  by  peaceful  means,  a  solution 
that  would  be  satisfactory  to  both  sides,  when  his  problem 
was  made  immensely  more  difficult  by  the  Boers  themselves, 
who,  in  December  1880,  rose  in  revolt  and  defeated  a  small 
detachment  of  British  troops  at  Majuba  Hill,  February  27,  Majuba 
1881.  In  a  military  sense  this  so-called  battle  of  Majuba  Hill. 
Hill  was  an  insignificant  affair,  but  its  effects  upon  English- 
men and  Boers  were  tremendous  and  far-reaching.  Glad- 
stone, who  had  already  been  negotiating  with  a  view  to  re- 
storing the  independence  of  the  Transvaal,  which  he  con- 
sidered had  been  unjustly  overthrown,  did  not  think  it  right 
to  reverse  his  policy  because  of  a  mere  skirmish,  however 
humiliating. 

He  therefore  restored   to   the   Boers   their   independence.  Policy 

but  with  the  express  reservation  of  the  "  suzerainty  "  of  the  ^^  ^  ^ 

^  .  .  .  ,        Gladstone 

British   Crown,    a   word   carrying  no   precise   meaning,    but  administra- 

resented  in  the  Transvaal  as  a  limitation  upon  its  perfect  tion, 

independence,   and  so  understood  in  England.     The  Boers 

were  allowed  complete  self-government  with  this  restriction, 

Gladstone's    action    was    severely    criticised   by    Englishmen 

who  did  not  believe  in  retiring,  leaving  a  defeat  unavenged. 

They  denounced  the  action  of  the  ministry  as  inimical  to  the 

welfare  of  the  South  African  colonies  and  damaging  to  the 

prestige  of  the  Empire.     Gladstone  did  not  believe  that  he 

should  be  deflected  from  an  act  of  justice  and  conciliation 

merely  because  of  a  military  misfortune  of  no  importance 

in  itself,  and  he  considered  that  giving  up  negotiations  pre- 


540  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

The  viously  begun,  promises  previously  made,  would  be  an  act 

Pretoria         gf  i^r^^  faith.     He  therefore  concluded  the  Pretoria  Conven- 
tion of  1881  with  its  mysterious  word  "  suzerainty." 

The  Boers,  on  the  other  hand,  considered  that  they  had 
won  their  independence  by  arms,  by  the  humiliation  of  the 
traditional  enemy,  and  were  accordingly  elated.  In  holding 
this  opinion  they  were  injuring  themselves  by  self-deception 
and  by  the  idea  that  what  they  once  had  done  they  could 
do  again,  and  they  were  angering  the  British  by  keeping 
alive  the  memory  of  Majuba  Hill.  That  name  came  to  be 
spoken  with  passion  on  both  sides. 

The  Pretoria  Convention  did  not  work  smoothly,  and 
The  London  consequently  a  new  agreement  was  dra^\Ti  up  in  1884.  This, 
Convention,  ^j^g  London  Convention,  restored  to  the  Transvaal  the  old 
name  of  South  African  Republic,  omitted  the  preamble  of  the 
Pretoria  Convention,  in  which  the  word  suzerainty  occuiTed, 
and  inserted  a  provision,  which  was  destined  to  gain  tre- 
mendous importance  later,  to  the  effect  that  "  white  men  were 
to  have  full  liberty  to  reside  in  any  part  of  the  republic,  to 
trade  in  it,  and  to  be  liable  to  the  same  taxes  only  as  those 
exacted  from  citizens  of  the  republic."  ^ 

Mr.  Gladstone's  biographer  in  summing  up  the  history  of 
the  relations  of  England  and  the  Transvaal  says  that  the 
Sand  River  Convention  of  1852  conferred  independence,  that 
the  Proclamation  of  1877  took  independence  away,  that  the 
Pretoria  Convention  of  1881  "  in  a  qualified  way  gave  it 
back,"  and  that  the  London  Convention  of  1884  "  qualified 
the  qualification  over  again  till  independence,  subject  to  two 
or  three  specified  conditions,  was  restored."  " 
The  Boers  The   London    Convention    was    naturally    regarded    as    a 

desire  un-     victory  by  the  Boers,  and  encouraged  them  to  believe  that 
qualified  in-    ...  .      .  .  .       ,  .  ,  ,  j       mi 

dependence.   ^^  *^"^^  ^^^  restrictions  it  contained  could  be  removed.      Ine 

word   "  suzerainty "   being   omitted    and   "  republic "   being 
given  them,  they  felt  that  they  were  once  more  masters  in 

^  Morley,  Gladstone  III,  45. 
"  Ibid. 


THE  ENGLISH  AND  THE  TRANSVAAL      541 

their  own  house.  On  the  other  hand,  they  were  not  entirely 
independent,  as  England  expressly  had  tlie  control  over  their 
foreign  relations.  Moreover,  the  phrase  concerning  immi- 
gration contained  the  germ  of  future  trouble,  which  in  the  end 
was  to  result  in  the  violent  overthrow  of  the  republic,  for  a 
momentous  change  in  the  character  of  the  population  was 
impending. 

The    South   African    Republic    was    entirely    peopled   by  The  Boers. 
Boers,   a   people   exclusively   interested   in    agriculture   and 
grazing,  solid,  sturdy,  religious,  freedom-loving,  but,  in  the 
modern  sense,  unprogressive,  ill-educated,  suspicious  of  for- 
eigners,  and  particularly   of  Englishmen.     The   peace   and 
contentment    of    this    rural    people    were    disturbed   by    the 
discovery,    in    188-i,    that    gold    in    immense    quantities    lay 
hidden  in  its   mountains,  the  Rand.     Immediately   a  great    , 
influx  of  miners  and  speculators  began.     These  were  chiefly  The 
Englislimen.     In  the  heart  of  the  mining  district  the  city  Uitlanders. 
of  Johannesburg  grew  rapidly,  numbering  in  a  few  years  over 
100,000  inhabitants,  a  city  of  foreigners.     Troubles  quickly 
arose  between  the  native  Boers  and  the  aggressive,  energetic 
Uitlanders  or  foreigners. 

The  Uitlanders  gave  wide  publicity  to  their  grievances. 
Great  obstacles  were  put  in  the  way  of  their  naturalization; 
they  were  given  no  share  in  the  government,  not  even  the 
right  to  vote.  Yet  in  parts  of  the  Transvaal  they  were 
more  numerous  than  the  natives,  and  bore  the  larger  share 
of  taxation.  In  addition  they  were  forced  to  render  military 
service,  which,  in  their  opinion,  implied  citizenship.  They 
looked  to  the  British  Government  to  push  their  demand  for 
reforms.  The  Boer  Government  was  undoubtedly  an  oli- 
garchy, but  the  Boers  felt  that  it  was  only  by  refusing  the 
suffrage  to  the  unwelcome  intruders  that  they  could  keep 
control  of  their  own  state,  which  at  the  cost  of  much  hardship 
they  had  created  in  the  wilderness.  In  1895  occurred  an  ^^^ 
event  which  deeply  embittered  them,  the  Jameson  Raid —  Jameson 
an  invasion  of  the  Transvaal  by  a  few  hundred  troopers  Raid. 


542  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Sir  Alfred 

Milner's 

reports. 


under  Dr.  Jameson,  the  administrator  of  Rhodesia,  with 
the  evident  purpose  of  supporting  the  Uitlanders,  and  prob- 
ably of  overturning  the  Boer  Government.  The  raiders  were 
easily  captured  by  the  Boers,  who  with  great  magnanimity 
handed  them  over  to  England.  This  indefensible  attack  and 
the  fact  that  the  guilty  were  only  lightly  punished  in  Eng- 
land, and  that  the  man  whom  all  Boers  held  responsible,  Mr. 
Cecil  Rhodes,  was  shielded  by  the  British  Government,  en- 
tered like  iron  into  the  souls  of  the  Boers  and  only  hard- 
ened their  resistance  to  the  demands  of  the  Uitlanders. 
These  demands  were  refused,  and  the  grievances  of  the 
Uitlanders,  who  now  outnumbered  the  natives  perhaps  two 
to  one,  continued. 

A  special  commissioner,  sent  out  from  England  in  1897, 
Sir  Alfred  Milner,  informed  his  Government  early  in  1899 
that  "the  spectacle  of  thousands  of  British  subjects  kept 
permanently  in  the  position  of  helots,  constantly  chafing 
under  undoubted  grievances,  and  calling  vainly  to  her  Maj- 
esty's Government  for  redress,  does  steadily  undermine  the 
influence  and  reputation  of  Great  Britain,  and  the  respect 
for  the  British  Government."  Milner  was  of  the  opinion 
that  the  Boers  were  aiming  ultimately  at  nothing  less  than 
the  union  of  all  the  Boers,  including  those  of  Cape  Colony, 
the  ultimate  expulsion  of  the  English  from  South  Africa, 
and  the  establishment  of  a  great  Boer  state.  "  I  can  see 
nothing  which  will  put  a  stop  to  this  mischievous  propa- 
ganda but  some  striking  proof  of  the  intention  of  her 
Majesty's  Goverment  not  to  be  ousted  from  its  position  in 
South  Africa."  This  claim  that  the  real  point  at  issue  was 
the  maintenance  of  England's  position  as  the  paramount 
power  in  South  Africa  exerted  a  great  influence  at  home. 
To  stop  this  "  mischievous  propaganda,"  which  was  under- 
mining British  influence,  the  policy  of  the  Transvaal  Gov- 
ernment must  be  changed,  and  it  could  only  be  changed  by 
giving  the  Uitlanders  political  power.  Therefore  the  right 
of  the  suffrage  was  insisted  upon  by  the  English  Government, 


THE  SOUTH  AFRICAN  WAR  543 

"  no  selfish  demand,"  said  Milner,  as  it  is  "  asking  for  noth- 
ing from  others  which  we  do  not  give  ourselves."  Confer- 
ences were  held  in  1899  at  Bloemfontein.  But  this  demand 
the  Boers  would  not  grant,  believing  that  it  was  a  matter 
of  self-preservation,  that  its  bestowal  would  simply  mean 
the  handing  over  of  the  country  to  the  foreigner. 

War  broke  out  in  October  1899.     The  Orange  Free  State,  The    South 
no   party   to   the   quarrel,   threw   in   its   lot   with   its   sister  ^^°^^ 
Boer  republic. 

This  war  was  lightly  entered  upon  by  both  sides.  Each 
grossly  underestimated  both  the  resources  and  the  spirit  of 
the  other.  The  English  Government  had  made  no  prepara- 
tion at  all  adequate,  apparently  not  believing  that  in  the 
end  this  petty  state  would  dare  oppose  the  mighty  British 
Empire.  The  Boers,  on  the  other  hand,  had  been  long  pre- 
paring for  a  conflict,  and  knew  that  the  number  of  British 
troops  in  South  Africa  was  small,  totally  insufficient  to 
put  down  their  resistance.  Moreover,  for  years  they  had 
deceived  themselves  with  a  gross  exaggeration  of  the  sig- 
nificance of  Majuba  Hill  as  a  victory  over  the  British. 
Each  side  believed  that  the  war  would  be  short,  and  would 
result  in  its  favor. 

The  war,  which  they  supposed  would  be  over  in  a  few 
months,  lasted  for  nearly  three  years.  England  suff^ered 
at  the  outset  many  humiliating  reverses.  The  war  was  not 
characterized  by  great  battles,  but  by  many  sieges  at  first, 
and  then  by  guerilla  fighting  and  elaborate,  systematic,  and 
difficult  conquest  of  the  country.  It  was  fought  with  great 
bravery  and  brilliancy  on  both  sides.  For  the  English, 
Lord  Roberts  and  Lord  Kitchener  were  the  leaders,  and  of 
the  Boers  several  greatly  distinguished  themselves,  obtaining 
world  wide  reputations,  Christian  de  Wet,  Louis  Botha, 
Delarey. 

The  English  won  in  the  end  by  sheer  force  of  numbers.  Victory  of 
Awakening  from  the  costly  misapprehension  of  the  first  days  *^®  English, 
concerning   the   nature   of   their   problem,   they   proceeded 


5U  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


Annexation 
of  the 
Transvaal 
and  the 
Orange 
Free  State. 


to  make  war  on  a  scale  absolutely  unprecedented  in  their 
annals.  No  general  in  English  history  has  ever  commanded 
so  many  troops  as  did  Lord  Roberts.  During  the  war 
England  sent  about  450,000  men  to  South  Africa.  Three 
hundred  and  forty  thousand  came  from  Great  Britain ;  the 
others  from  the  colonies,  Canada,  Australia,  India,  and  Cape 
Colony.  In  the  closing  months  Lord  Kitchener  had  more 
than  250,000  men  against  perhaps  ten  or  twelve  thousand 
opponents. 

Peace  was  finally  concluded  on  June  1,  1902.  The  Trans- 
vaal and  the  Orange  Free  State  lost  their  independence,  and 
became  colonies  of  the  British  Empire.  Otherwise  the  terms 
offered  by  the  conquerors  were  liberal.  Generous  money 
grants  and  loans  were  to  be  made  by  England  to  enable  the 
Boers  to  begin  again  in  their  sadly  devastated  land.  Their 
language  was  to  be  respected  wherever  possible. 

The  work  of  reconciliation  has  proceeded  with  remarkable 
rapidity  since  the  close  of  the  war.  Responsible  govern- 
ment, that  is,  self-government,  was  granted  to  the  Transvaal 
Colony  in  1906  and  to  the  Orange  River  Colony  in  1907. 
This  liberal  conduct  of  the  English  Government  has  had 
the  most  happy  consequences,  as  is  shown  very  convincingly 
by  the  spontaneity  and  the  strength  of  the  movement  for 
closer  union,  which  culminated  in  1909  in  the  creation  of 
a  new  "  colonial  nation  "  within  the  British  Empire.  In 
1908  a  convention  was  held  in  which  the  four  colonies  were 
represented.  The  outcome  of  its  deliberations,  which  lasted 
several  months,  was  the  draft  of  a  constitution  for  the  South 
African  Union.  This  was  then  submitted  to  the  colonies  for 
approval  and,  by  June  1909,  had  been  ratified  by  them  all. 
The  constitution  was  in  the  form  of  a  statute  to  be  enacted 
by  the  British  Parliament.    It  became  law  September  20, 1909. 

The  South  African  Union  is  substantially  a  unified,  rather 
than  a  federal  state.  While  the  provinces  are  preserved 
their  powers  are  very  limited.  The  central  government  con- 
sists of  a  Governor-General  appointed  by   the   Crown;   an 


THE  UNION  OF  SOUTH  AFRICA  545 

Executive  Council;  a  Senate  of  forty  members,  eight  from 
each  province,  and  eight  appointed  by  the  Governor  in  Coun- 
cil, and  serving  for  ten  years  and  a  House  of  Assembly,  con- 
sisting of  121  members,  of  whom  51  represent  Cape  of  Good 
Hope  Province,  36  Transvaal  Province,  17  Orange  Free 
State  Province,  and  17  Natal  Province.  Both  Dutch  and 
English  are  official  languages  and  enjoy  equal  privileges. 
Difficulty  was  experienced  in  selecting  the  capital,  so  intense 
was  the  rivalry  of  different  cities.  The  result  was  a  com- 
promise. Pretoria  was  chosen  as  the  seat  of  the  executive 
branch  of  the  government,  Cape  Town  as  the  seat  of  the 
legislative  branch. 

The  creation  of  the  South  African  Union  Is  the  most  recent 
triumph  of  the  spirit  of  nationality  which  has  so  greatly 
transformed  the  world  since  1815.  The  new  commonwealth 
has  a  population  of  about  1,150,000  whites  and  more  than 
6,000,000  people  of  non-European  descent.  Provision  has 
been  made  for  the  ultimate  admission  of  Rhodesia  into  the 
Union. 

IMPERIAL  FEDERATION 

At  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century  Great  Britain 
possesses  an  empire  far  more  extensive  and  far  more  pop- 
ulous than  any  the  world  has  ever  seen,  covering  about 
thirteen  millions  of  square  miles,  if  Egypt  and  the  Soudan 
be  included,  with  a  total  population  of  over  four  hun- 
dred and  twenty  millions.     This  Empire  is  scattered  every-  The  far 

where,  in  Asia,  Africa,  Australasia,  the  two  Americas,  and  J^^^.  ^ 
'  '  '  .        .  British 

the  islands  of  the  seven  seas.  The  population  includes  a  Empire, 
motley  host  of  peoples.  Only  fifty-four  million  are  English- 
speaking,  and  of  these  about  forty-two  million  live  in  Great 
Britain.  Most  of  the  colonies  are  self-supporting.  They 
present  every  form  of  government,  military,  autocratic,  rep- 
resentative, democratic.  The  sea  alone  binds  the  Empire. 
England's  throne  is  on  the  mountain  wave  in  a  literal  as  well 
as  in  a  metaphorical  sense.     Dominance  of  the  oceans  is  essen- 


546  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 


The 

problem 


tial  that  slie  may  keep  open  her  communications  with  her  far 
flung  colonies.  It  is  no  adventitious  circumstance  that  Eng- 
land is  the  greatest  sea-power  of  the  world,  and  intends  to 
remain  such.  She  regards  this  as  the  very  vital  principle  of 
her  imperial  existence. 

A  noteworthy  feature  of  the  British  Empire,  as  already 
sufficiently  indicated,  is  the  almost  unlimited  autonomy  en- 
joyed by  several  of  the  colonies,  those  where  the  English  stock 
predominates,  Canada,  Australia,  South  Africa,  New 
Zealand.  This  policy  is  in  contrast  to  that  pursued  by  the 
French  and  German  governments,  which  rule  their  colonies 
directly  from  Paris  and  Berlin.  But  this  system  does  not 
apply  to  the  greatest  of  them  all,  India,  nor  to  a  multitude 
of  smaller  posssessions. 

A  question  much  and  earnestly  discussed  during  the  last 
twenty-five  years  is  that  of  Imperial  Federation.  May  not 
V  a  "^^.^."^  some  machinery  be  developed,  some  method  be  found,  whereby 
the  vast  empire  may  be  more  closely  consolidated,  and  for 
certain  purposes  act  as  a  single  state. '^  If  so,  its  power  will 
be  greatly  augmented,  and  the  world  will  witness  the  most 
stupendous  achievement  in  the  art  of  government  recorded  in 
its  history.  The  creation  of  such  a  Greater  Britain  has  seized, 
in  recent  years,  the  imagination  of  many  thoughtful  statesmen. 

Various  causes  have  occurred  to  give  this  question  prom- 
inence in  recent  years.  The  growth  of  pride  in  an  empire, 
the  like  of  which  has  never  been  seen  before  in  the  history  of 
man,  is  one.  The  English  attitude  toward  the  colonies  has, 
moreover,  radically  changed  in  the  last  century  from  one  of 
indifference,  or  passing  condescension,  to  one  of  lively  in- 
terest In  their  welfare  and  satisfaction  In  their  success. 
Again,  the  British  Isles  alone  have  rivals  In  Importance  now 
which  they  did  not  formerly  have.  During  the  period  cov- 
ered by  this  book,  Italy  and  Germany  have  arisen,  the  former 
with  a  population  nearly  as  large  as  that  of  Great  Britain, 
the  other  with  one  larger  by  half.  Russia  has  increased 
from  forty-five  millions  to  a  hundred  and  fifty,  and  in  the 


The 

increasing 
importance 
of  the 
question. 


IMPERIAL  FEDERATION  547 

west  the  United  States  have  expanded  until  they  stretch 
from  sea  to  sea,  their  population  mounting  from  less  than 
nine  million  to  more  than  ninety.  Relatively  the  British 
Isles  are  less  commanding  than  they  were.  Another  reason 
for  federation  is  that  the  price  paid  for  an  empire  so  vast 
as  the  British  is  large,  the  burden  heavy.  Ought  not  the 
constituent  parts,  which  profit  from  their  membership  in 
it,  to  help  support  it? 

The  difficulties  in  the  way,  however,  of  closer  union  are  The 
various  and  formidable.  In  the  first  place  it  could  only  difficulties 
include  the  self-governing  colonies,  where  the  English  stock 
predominates.  Thus  India,  with  its  three  hundred  millions, 
would  be  left  out.  Moreover,  federation  implies  important 
concessions  from  those  states  that  enter.  Would  England 
be  willing  to  make  such  concessions  herself,  and  if  she  were, 
would  the  colonies.'*  The  question  cannot  be  answered 
affirmatively  in  either  case.  If  the  new  and  closer  union  is  The 
to  take  the  form  of  a  political  body  in  which  the  British  Problem  of 
Isles,  Canada,  Australia,  South  Africa  shall  be  all  repre- 
sented, what  shall  that  body  be.'^  Shall  it  be  the  House  of 
Commons?  If  the  colonies  send  representatives  to  West- 
minster they  will  be  a  small  minority,  for  the  population  of 
Great  Britain  is  forty-two  million,  theirs  collectively  thirteen 
million.  Moreover,  such  representatives  could  vote  on  local 
English  questions,  could  make  and  unmake  ministries.  We 
have  here  the  dilemma  which,  as  we  have  seen,  baffled  Glad- 
stone in  his  attempt  to  provide  Home  Rule  for  Ireland  and 
yet  keep  her  in  the  Empire.  Or  shall  an  entirely  new  Im- 
perial Parliament  be  created  to  which  Great  Britain  and  the 
colonies  shall  send  delegates?  What  shall  be  the  relation 
of  the  new  parliament  to  the  old  historic  one?  Again,  even 
in  it,  the  colonists  would  be  outnumbered.  Moreover,  shall 
Canada  and  Australia  be  forced  to  go  to  war  at  the  bidding 
of  a  majority  composed  of  Englishmen?  To  ask  these 
questions  is  to  show  the  extreme  difficulty  of  answering  them. 

But  may  not  the  union  be  commercial  rather  than  political, 


54,8  BRITISH  EMPIRE  IN  NINETEENTH  CENTURY 

Commercial    the  latter  being  so  difficult  to  work  out?     Here  we  have  the 
union.  contrast  between   the   mother   country,   devoted   for   half  a 

century  to  free  trade,  and  the  colonies,  ardent  supporters  of 
protection  even  against  Great  Britain.  The  most  promising 
scheme  suggested  thus  far  is  that  of  preferential  tariffs, 
England  favoring  the  colonies  if  the  colonies  will  favor  her, 
and  some  slight  steps  in  this  direction  have  been  taken ; 
for  instance,  Canada  and  Australia  have  recently  made  some 
concessions  in  tariff  rates  to  England  which  they  do  not  make 
to  other  countries.  But  this  arrangement  cannot  go  far 
until  England  can  make  concessions  to  them  which  she  cannot 
do  under  the  system  of  free  trade.  Mr.  Chamberlain,  whose 
interest  in  imperial  development  is  both  broad  and  deep, 
is  anxious  to  do  this,  and  he  has  had  much  influence  in 
making  the  question  of  preferential  duties  prominent  in 
England  to-day.  But  the  election  of  1906,  resulting  in  the 
overwhelming  defeat  of  his  party,  showed  that  England  was 
far  from  ready  to  abandon  free  trade,  as  on  the  whole  to  her 
advantage,  if  not  essential  to  her  very  existence. 

The  whole  subject  abounds  in  problems  too  complex  to 
be  easily,  if  ever,  solved.  None  the  less  it  is  one  of  indis- 
putable interest,  a  provoking  challenge  to  the  boasted  and 
proved  ability  of  English  speaking  peoples  in  the  art  of 
government  and  politics. 
Colonial  Perhaps  a  beginning  toward  its  solution  has  been  found 

conferences,  in  the  colonial  conferences,  held  in  recent  years  in  London, 
the  first  in  1887,  the  second  in  1897,  under  the  presidency 
of  Mr.  Chamberlain,  another  in  1902,  and  the  latest  in  1907. 
These  have  discussed  at  length  many  phases  of  the  problem, 
but  have  as  yet  accomplished  little.  The  last  one,  however, 
established  the  imperial  conference  as  a  permanent  institu- 
tion rather  than  as  an  episodic  occurrence.  Henceforth  one 
is  to  be  held  every  four  years. ^ 

'  The  best  treatment  of  this  subject  in  a  small  compass  is  to  be  found 
in  Chapter  LVIll  of  President  Lowell's  remarkable  book,  The  Govern- 
ment of  England,  many  of  whose  observations  I  have  incorporated  in  this 
paragraph. 


CONFEDERATIONS  WITHIN  THE  EMPIRE      549 

The  work   of  co-operation,   out   of  which   a  real   federal  Confedera- 

.„  1     1  .     1       •  1     tions  within 

empire  may   in  time  emerge,  will,  no  doubt,   be   immensely  ^^^  Empire 

facilitated  by  the  existence  of  the  four  self-governing  "  na- 
tions "  whose  rise  has  been  traced — the  Dominion  of  Canada, 
the  Commonwealth  of  Australia,  the  Dominion  of  New  Zea- 
land, and  the  Union  of  South  Africa.  The  reduction  of  the 
number  of  units,  with  which  imperial  statesmen  will  have 
to  deal  in  attempting  a  more  wide-spreading  organization, 
diminishes  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  federation,  difficulties 
at  best  numerous  and  formidable  enough.  The  advantages 
of  the  combinations  that  have  already  been  effected  can,  from 
an  imperial  point  of  view,  hardly  be  exaggerated.  Three  of 
these  colonial  consolidations  have  been  consummated  during 
the  first  decade  of  the  twentieth  century.  The  movement  may 
proceed  with  accelerating  speed. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 
THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 

Lying  almost  within  sight  of  Europe  and  forming  the 
southern  boundary  of  her  great  inland  sea  is  the  immense 
continent,  three  times  the  size  of  Europe,  whose  real  nature 
was  revealed  only  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  In  some  respects  the  seat  of  very  ancient  history, 
in  most  its  history  is  just  beginning.  In  Egypt  a  rich  and 
advanced  civilization  appeared  in  very  early  times  along  the 
lower  valley  of  the  Nile.  Yet  only  after  thousands  of  years 
and  only  in  our  own  day  have  the  sources  and  the  upper 
course  of  that  famous  river  been  discovered.  Along  the 
northern  coasts  arose  the  civilization  and  state  of  Carthage, 
rich,  mysterious,  and  redoubtable,  for  a  while  the  powerful 
rival  of  Rome,  succumbing  to  the  latter  only  after  severe 
and  memorable  struggles.  The  ancient  world  knew  there- 
fore the  northern  shores  of  Africa.  The  rest  was  prac- 
The  period  tically  unknown.  In  the  fifteenth  century  came  the  great 
of  dis-  series  of  geographical  discoveries,  which  immensely  widened 

covery.  ^^^  known  boundaries   of  the   world.     It  might   seem  that 

Africa,  rather  than  America  and  Asia,  would  have  been 
the  important  conquest  of  that  marvelous  period  of  human 
curiosity  and  courage.  But  this  was  not  the  case.  Europe 
was  seeking  primarily  riches,  and  riches  were  to  be  found, 
as  events  proved,  in  Peru,  and  Mexico,  and  India,  rather 
than  in  the  great  continental  mass  on  its  very  threshold. 
The  age  of  exploration  did,  it  is  true,  reveal  the  hitherto 
unknown  outline  and  magnitude  of  the  continent.  Portu- 
guese explorers  pushed  further  and  further  south  until  they 
finally  rounded  the  southern  cape,  and  then  sailed  away  to- 

550 


AFRICA  IN  1815  661 

ward  India,  so  alluring  with  its  gems  and  spices.  Diaz,  Vasco 
da  Gama,  are  shining  names  in  this  romantic  history.  But 
the  result  was  not  the  conquest  of  Africa  and  its  introduction 
into  European  civilization.  America,  and  even  Australia, 
then  unknown,  were  destined  to  receive  the  civilization  of 
Europe  long  before  that  continent.  A  melancholy  beginning 
was,  however,  made.  No  ancient  civilization  offered  its 
riches  to  the  spoliation  of  Europeans,  as  in  Mexico,  Peru, 
and  India.  But  property  in  human  beings  was  to  be  had 
in  abundance  for  little  effort.  The  African  slave  trade 
began,  "  black  ivory,"  and  stations  were  established  by  the 
Portuguese,  and  later  by  other  nations  for  this  business, 
which  was  both  lucrative  and  inhuman.  These  posts  were 
simply  along  the  shores.  The  great  inner  mass  of  the  conti- 
nent remained  as  before,  unknown,  mainly  because  of  the  diffi- 
culty of  penetrating  it,  owing  to  its  lack  of  rivers  navigable 
from  the  sea.  For  centuries  Europe,  absorbed  in  multifarious 
struggles,  whence  emerged  its  modern  civilization,  paid  slight 
attention  to  the  mystery  which  lay  near  at  hand.  Moreover, 
it  had  not  the  means,  mechanical  and  scientific,  for  the  ex- 
ploration of  this  enigmatic  and  dangerous  land.  And  such 
remained  the  case  down  to  the  nineteenth  century,  and,  in- 
deed, well  into  it.  Africa  is  the  great  field  of  discovery  of 
that  century  as  America  was  of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth. 

In  1815  the  situation  was  as  follows :  the  Turkish  Empire  Situation 
extended  along  the  whole  northern  coast  to  Morocco,  that  ^^  1815. 
is,  the  Sultan  was  nominally  sovereign  of  Egypt,  Tripoli, 
Tunis,  and  Algeria.  Morocco  was  then,  as  now,  independ- 
ent under  its  own  sultan.  Along  the  western  coasts  were 
scattered  settlements,  or  rather  stations,  of  England,  France, 
Denmark,  Holland,  Spain,  and  Portugal.  Portugal  had 
certain  claims  on  the  eastern  coast,  opposite  Madagascar. 
England  had  just  acquired  the  Dutch  Cape  Colony  whence, 
as  we  have  seen,  her  expansion  into  a  great  South  African 
power  has  proceeded.  The  interior  of  the  continent  wa§ 
unknown,  and  was  of  interest  only  to  geographers, 


65S 


THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 


The 
French 
conquest 
of   Algeria. 


For  sixty  years  after  1815,  progress  in  the  appropriation 
of  Africa  by  Europe  was  slow.  The  most  important  annex- 
ation was  that  of  Algeria  by  France  between  1830  and  181<7. 
In  the  south,  England  was  spreading  out,  and  the  Boers  were 
founding  their  two  republics. 

European  annexation  waited  upon  exploration.  Africa 
was  the  "  dark  continent,"  and  until  the  darkness  was  lifted 
it  was  not  coveted.  About  the  middle  of  the  century  the 
darkness  began  to  disappear.  Explorers  penetrated  further 
and  further  into  the  interior,  traversing  the  continent  in 
various  directions,  opening  a  chapter  of  geographical  dis- 
covery of  absorbing  interest.  It  is  impossible  within  our 
limits  to  do  more  than  allude  to  the  wonderful  work  partici- 
pated in  by  many  intrepid  explorers,  Englishmen,  French- 
men, Portuguese,  Dutch,  Germans,  and  Belgians.  A  few 
incidents  only  can  be  mentioned. 

It  was  natural  that  Europeans  should  be  curious  about 
the  sources  of  the  Nile,  a  river  famous  since  the  dawn  of 
history,  but  whose  source  remained  enveloped  in  obscurity. 
In  1858  one  source  was  found  by  Speke,  an  English  explorer, 
to  consist  of  a  great  lake  south  of  the  equator,  to  which  the 
name  Victoria  Nyanza  was  given.  Six  years  later  another 
Englishman,  Sir  Samuel  Baker,  discovered  another  lake, 
also  a  source,  and  named  it  Albert  Nyanza. 

Two  names  particularly  stand  out  in  this  record  of  African 
exploration,  Livingstone  and  Stanley.  David  Livingstone, 
Livingstone,  a  Scotch  missionary  and  traveler,  began  his  African  career 
in  1840,  and  continued  it  until  his  death  in  1873  at  Chitambo, 
not  far  from  the  shores  of  Lake  Bangweolo,  which  he  had 
previously  discovered.  He  traced  the  course  of  the  Zambesi 
River,  of  the  upper  Congo,  and  the  region  round  about  Lakes 
Tanganyika  and  Nyassa.  He  crossed  Africa  from  sea  to 
sea  in  higher  latitudes  than  had  hitherto  been  traversed.  He 
opened  up  a  new  country  to  the  world.  His  explorations 
caught  the  attention  of  Europe,  and  when,  on  one  of  his 
journeys,  Europe  thought  that  he  was  lost  or  dead,  and  an 


The 

sources  of 
the  Nile. 


David 


STANLEY'S  EXPLORATIONS  553 

expedition  was  sent  out  to  find  him,  that  expedition  riveted 

the  attention  of  Europe  as  no  other  in  African  history  had 

done.      It  was  under  the  direction   of  Henry   M.    Stanley,  Stanley. 

sent  out  by  the  New  York  Herald.     Stanley's  story  of  how 

he   found  Livingstone   was   read  with  the  greatest  interest 

in  Europe,  and  heightened  the  desire,  already  widespread, 

for  more  knowledge  about  the  great  continent.     Livingstone, 

whose  name  is  the  most  important  in  the  history  of  African 

exploration,   died  in   1873.     His   body  was   borne  with   all 

honor  to  England  and  given  the  burial  of  a  national  hero 

in  Westminster  Abbey. 

Another  African  explorer  was  Cameron,  sent  out  from 
England  by  the  Royal  Geographical  Society  to  rescue 
Livingstone.  He  failed  in  this,  as  Livingstone  died  before 
his  arrival,  but  Cameron  made  a  remarkable  journey  across 
Africa  from  east  to  west.  He  was  the  first,  indeed,  to 
cross  the  continent  in  that  direction. 

By  this  time  not  only  was  the  scientific  curiosity  of  Europe 
thoroughly  aroused,  but  missionary  zeal  saw  a  new  field 
for  activity.  Thus  Stanley's  journey  across  Africa,  from 
1874  to  1878,  was  followed  in  Europe  with  an  attention 
unparalleled  in  the  history  of  modern  explorations.  Stanley  Stanley's 
explored  the  equatorial  lake  region,  making  important  addi-  explora- 
tions to  knowledge.  His  great  work  was,  however,  his  ex- 
ploration  of  the  Congo  River  system.  Little  had  been  known 
of  this  river  save  its  lower  course  as  it  approached  the  sea. 
Stanley  proved  that  it  was  one  of  the  largest  rivers  in  ^he 
world,  that  its  length  was  more  than  three  thousand  miles, 
that  it  was  fed  by  an  enormous  number  of  tributaries,  that 
it  drained  an  area  of  over  1,300,000  square  miles,  that  in  the 
volume  of  its  waters  it  was  only  exceeded  by  the  Amazon. 

Thus,  by  1880,  the  scientific  enthusiasm  and  curiosity, 
the  missionary  and  philanthropic  zeal  of  Europeans,  the 
hatred  of  slave  hunters  who  plied  their  trade  in  the  interior, 
had  solved  the  great  mystery  of  Africa.  The  map  showed 
rivers  and  lakes  where  previously  all  had  been  blank. 


554 


THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 


Africa  Upon  discovery  quickly  followed  appropriation.     France 

b^^  Eurl^l^^  entered  upon  her  protectorate  of  Tunis  in  1881,  England 
upon  her  "  occupation  "  of  Egypt  in  1882.  This  was  a 
signal  for  a  general  scramble.  A  feverish  period  of  parti- 
tion succeeded  the  long,  slow  one  of  discovery.  European 
powers  swept  down  upon  this  continent  lying  at  their  very 
door,  hitherto  neglected  and  despised,  and  carved  it  up 
among  themselves.  This  they  did  without  recourse  to  war 
by  a  series  of  treaties  among  themselves  defining  the  bound- 
aries of  their  claims.  Africa  became  an  annex  of  Europe. 
Out  of  this  rush  for  territories  the  great  powers,  England, 
France,  and  Germany,  naturally  emerged  with  the  largest 
acquisitions,  but  Portugal  and  Italy  each  secured  a  share. 
The  situation  and  relative  extent  of  these  may  best  be 
appreciated  by  an  examination  of  the  map.  Most  of  the 
treaties  by  which  this  division  was  effected  were  made  be- 
tween 1884  and  1890. 

One  feature  of  this  appropriation  of  Africa  by  Europe 
was  the  foundation  of  the  Congo  Free  State.  This  was 
the  work  of  the  second  king  of  Belgium,  Leopold  II,  a  man 
who  was  greatly  interested  in  the  exploration  of  that  con- 
tinent. After  the  discoveries  of  Livingstone,  and  the  early 
ones  of  Stanley,  he  called  a  conference  of  the  powers  in  1876 
"  to  discuss  the  question  of  the  exploration,  and  the  civiliza- 
tion of  Africa,  and  the  means  of  opening  up  the  interior  of  the 
continent  to  the  commerce,  industry,  and  scientific  enterprise 
of  the  civilized  world,"  and  to  consider  measures  for  ex- 
tinguishing "  the  terrible  scourge  of  slavery  known  to  pre- 
vail over  wide  and  populous  tracts  in  the  interior  of  the 
continent."  This  conference  was  participated  in  by  Great 
Britain,  Belgium,  France,  Germany,  Austria-Hungary,  Italy, 
and  Russia.  As  a  result  of  its  deliberations  an  International 
African  Association  was  established,  which  was  to  have  its 
seat  in  Brussels,  and  whose  aim  was  to  be  the  exploration 
and  civilization  of  central  Africa.  Each  nation  wishing 
to  co-operate  was  to  collect  funds  for  the  common  object. 


The  Congo 
Free  State. 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  CONGO  FREE  STATE       555 

But   the    international    chjiracter   of   the   movement    thus  Inter- 
started  was  not  long  maintained.     Most  of  the  contributions      .  ^^   ^^ 
came  from  Belgium.     Stanley  reached  Europe  in  1878  with  t^g  Congo 
the  remarkable  additions  of  knowledge  which  his  trip  across  Free  State. 
Darkest    Africa    had   given   him.     He    was    sent   back    the 
following  year  nominally  under  the  auspices   of  the  Inter- 
national Association  of  the  Congo,  an  organization  formed 
in  1879,  and  the  practical  successor  of  the  former  African 
Association,  just  alkided  to.      Stanley,  hitherto  an  explorer, 
now   became,   in   addition,   an    organizer   and   state   builder. 
During  the  next  four  or  five  years,  1879-84  he  made  hundreds 
of   treaties    with    native    chiefs    and    founded    many    stations 
in   the  Congo   basin.      Nominally   an  emissary   of   an   inter- 
national association,  his  expenses  were  largely  borne  by  King 
Leopold  II. 

Portugal  now  put  forth  extensive  claims  to  much  of  this  •^^^  Berlin 
,,  •  .,  1      f  •  r  rr     Conference. 

Congo    region    on    the   ground    or    previous    discovery,      io 

adjust  tliese  claims  and  other  matters  a  general  conference 
was  lield  in  Berlin,  in  1884-5,  attended  by  all  the  states  of 
Europe,  with  the  exception  of  Switzerland,  and  also  by 
the  United  States.  The  conference  recognized  the  exist- 
ence as  an  independent  power  of  the  Congo  Free  State, 
with  an  extensive  area,  most  of  the  Congo  basin.  It  was 
evidently  its  understanding  that  this  was  to  be  a  neutral 
and  international  state.  Trade  in  it  was  to  be  open  to 
all  nations  on  equal  terms,  the  rivers  were  to  be  free  to  all, 
and  only  such  dues  were  to  be  levied  as  should  be  required 
to  provide  for  the  necessities  of  commerce.  No  trade 
monopolies  were  to  be  granted.  The  conference,  however, 
provided  no  machinery  for  the  enforcement  of  its  decrees. 
Those  decrees  have  remained  unfulfilled.  The  state  quickly 
ceased  to  be  international,  monopolies  have  been  granted, 
trade  in  the  Congo  has  not  been  free  to  all. 

The  new  state  became  practically  Belgian.  In  1885, 
Leopold  II  assumed  the  position  of  sovereign,  declaring  that 
the  connection  of  the  Congo  Free  State  and  Belgium  should 


556 


THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 


Leopold  II 
and  the 
Congo  Free 
State. 


Criticism 
Leopold's 
administra 
tion. 


be  merely  personal,  he  being  iniler  of  both,  and  that  the 
former,  like  the  latter,  should  be  entirely  neutral.  The 
Belgian  parliament  gave  its  consent,  and  the  powers  gave 
their  approval.  Leopold  granted  to  the  new  state  a  con- 
stitution of  an  autocratic  character,  and  in  the  succeeding 
years  acted  as  if  it  were  entirely  his  private  possession. 
His  position  was  that  of  sovereign  and  proprietor  com- 
bined. In  1889  he  announced  that  by  his  will  all  his  sov- 
ereign rights  in  the  Congo  should  go  to  Belgium  after  his 
death.  This,  of  course,  was  an  infraction  of  the  Berlin  Act 
of  1885  as  he  had  no  right  to  will  an  international  state 
without  the  consent  of  the  powers.  The  powers,  however, 
recorded  no  protest,  probably  because  the  new  state  was 
nearly  bankrupt,  and  they  were  not  disposed  to  contribute 
to  its  maintenance  and  development.  In  reality  the  Congo 
Free  State  was  not  a  free  state  at  all,  but  the  personal 
property  of  King  Leopold.  He  possessed  there  practically 
unlimited  power  in  the  making  and  execution  of  laws.  An 
international  state  became  a  personal  appanage  of  the 
King  of  Belgium,  largely  because  the  powers  did  nothing  for 
the  Congo  while  Leopold  gave  it  liberal  and  constant  support, 
of  In  recent  years  Leopold's  policy  has  been  vehemently'  de- 
nounced. State  monopolies  have  been  established,  and 
monopolies  have  been  granted  to  private  companies.  In 
the  exploitation  of  the  natural  resources,  particularly  the 
immensely  valuable  rubber  trees,  and  in  the  building  of 
railroads,  it  has  been  asserted  that  the  natives  have  been 
reduced  to  practical  slavery.  Fearful  stories  of  inhuman 
treatment  meted  out  to  women  as  well  as  to  men,  of  endless 
and  crushing  toil  imposed  upon  them,  of  outrage,  murders, 
whippings  freely  inflicted,  and  greatly  reducing  the  popu- 
lation, have  gained  wide,  and  it  would  appear,  making 
some  allowance  for  exaggeration,  justified  credence.  The 
existence  of  the  gravest  abuses  was  affirmed  by  a  commission 
of  investigation  appointed  by  the  King  himself.  After  a  study 
of  their  report,  published  in  October  1905,  a  professor  in  the 


THE  CONGO  COLONY  557 

University  of  Brussels  wrote  as  follows :  "  An  examination  of 
the  Congo  Free  State  administration  reveals  the  clear  and 
indisputable  fact  that  the  Congo  Free  State  is  not  a  colony  in 
the  proper  sense  of  the  term :  it  is  a  financial  speculation. 
The  real  aims  of  those  in  authority  are  pecuniary — to  in- 
crease the  amount  yielded  by  taxation,  to  exploit  the  natural 
wealth  of  the  country,  to  effect  all  that  can  stimulate  the 
powers  of  production.  Everything  else  is  subordinated  to 
this  end.  The  colony  is  administered  neither  in  the  interest  of 
the  natives  nor  even  of  the  economic  interests  of  Belgium ;  the 
moving  desire  is  to  assure  the  sovereign  king  the  maximum 
of  pecuniary  benefit."  ^ 

In  recent  years  the  revelations  of  the  atrocious  conditions 
prevailing  in  the  Congo  have  become  steadily  more  numerous 
and   more   shocking.     Other   powers,   notably   England   and 
the  United  States,  finally  aroused,  have  demanded  reforms. 
The  result  has  been  that  the  Belgian  ministry  and  Parliament  ^^®  Congo 
have  been  forced  by  the  public  opinion  of  the  world  to  take  „j„  ^ 
up  this  question,  and  in  1908  the  Congo  Free  State  was  con-  colony  of 
verted  outright  into   a  Belgian   colony  subject,  not  to  the  Belgium, 
personal  rule  of  the  King,  but  to  Parliament. 

EGYPT 

Egypt,  a  seat  of  ancient  civilization,  was  conquered  by  Egypt, 
the  Mohammedans  soon  after  the  rise  of  their  religion. 
Some  centuries  later  it  was  conquered  by  the  Turks,  and 
became  a  part  of  the  Turkish  Empire  (1517).  It  Is  nom- 
inally such  to-day.  Its  supreme  ruler  being  the  Sultan,  who 
resides  in  Constantinople.  But  a  series  of  remarkable  events 
in  the  nineteenth  century  has  resulted  In  giving  it  a  most 
singular   and   complicated  position.     To   put   down   certain 

opponents  of  the  Sultan  an  Albanian  warrior,  Mehemet  AH,  ^^^^"^«* 

Ah  founds 
was   sent   out   early   In   the  nineteenth  century.     Appointed  a  semi-royal 

Governor  of  Egypt  In  1806,  by  1811  he  had  made  himself  house. 
*  Quoted  in  Bliss,  Encyclopedia  of  Social  Reform,  270. 


558 


THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 


Ismail  and 
the  rapid 
growth  of 
the  Egyp- 
tian debt. 


absolute  master  of  the  country.  He  had  succeeded  only  too 
well.  Originally  merely  the  representative  of  the  Sultan, 
he  had  become  the  real  ruler  of  the  land.  His  ambitions 
grew  with  his  successes.  In  time  he  aspired  to  add  Syria 
to  his  states,  but  was  checked  in  this  by  a  European  in- 
tervention in  184)0.  He  was  compelled  to  acknowledge  the 
suzerainty  of  the  Porte  once  more,  and  to  limit  his  rule 
to  Egypt,  but  he  gained  in  turn  the  important  concession 
that  the  right  to  rule  as  viceroy  should  be  hereditary  in  his 
family.  The  title  was  later  changed  to  that  of  Khedive 
(1866).  The  present  Khedive,  Abbas  II,  is  the  seventh 
ruler  of  the  dynasty  thus  founded. 

The  fifth  ruler  of  this  family  was  Ismail  (1863-79). 
It  was  under  him  that  the  Suez  Canal  was  completed,  a 
great  undertaking  carried  through  by  a  French  engineer, 
Ferdinand  de  Lesseps,  the  money  coming  largely  from 
European  investors.  This  Khedive  plunged  into  the  most 
reckless  extravagance.  As  a  result  the  Egj^ptian  debt  rose 
with  extraordinary  rapidity  from  three  million  pounds  in 
1863  to  eighty-nine  million  in  1876.  This,  as  well  as  the 
increased  taxation  which  characterized  the  same  years,  was 
a  crushing  burden  for  a  poor  and  ignorant  population. 
Sir  Alfred  Milner  after  studying  the  situation  declared: 
"  There  is  nothing  in  the  financial  history  of  any  country, 
from  the  remotest  ages  to  the  present  time,  to  equal  this 
carnival  of  extravagance  and  oppression." 

The  Khedive,  needing  money,  sold,  in  1875,  his  shares  in 
the  Suez  Ca-nal  Company  to  Great  Britain  for  about  four 
million  pounds,  to  the  great  irritation  of  the  French.  They 
are  now  worth  seven  times  as  much.  This  was  a  mere 
temporary  relief  to  the  Khedive's  finances,  but  was  an  im- 
portant advantage  to  England,  as  the  canal  was  destined 
inevitably  to  be  the  favorite  route  to  India. 

The  extraordinary  increase  of  the  Egyptian  debt  is  the 
key  to  the  whole  later  history  of  that  country.  The  money 
had  been  borrowed  abroad,  mainly  in  England  and  France. 


ENGLISH  INTERVENTION  IN  EGYPT       559 

Fearing  the  bankruptcy  of  Egypt,  the  governments  of  the  Interven- 

two  countries  intervened  in  the  interest  of  their  investors,  _     , 

England 
and  succeeded  in  imposing  their  control  over  a  large  part  ^j^^ 

of  the  financial  administration.     This  was  the  famous  Dual  France. 
Control,  which  lasted  from  1879  to  1883.     The  Khedive, 
Ismail,   resented  this   tutelage,   was   consequently   forced   to 
abdicate,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Tewfik,  who  ruled 
from   1879   to    1892.     The  new   Khedive   did   not   struggle 
against  the  Dual  Control,  but  certain  elements  of  the  popu- 
lation did.     The  bitter  hatred  inspired  by  this  intervention 
of  the  foreigners  flared  up  in  a  native  movement  that  had 
as   its   war   cry,   "  Egypt   for  the  Egyptians,"   and   as   its  Revolt  of 
leader,  Arabi  Pasha,   an  officer  in  the   army.     Before   this  -^rabi 
movement   of  his   subjects   the   Khedive   was   powerless.     It 
was    evident    that    the    foreign    control,    established    in    the 
interests  of  foreign  bond-holders,  could  only  be  perpetuated 
by  the  suppression  of  Arabi  and  his  fellow-malcontents,  and 
that  that  suppression   could  be   accomplished   only   by   the 
foreigners     themselves.      Thus     financial     intervention     led 
directly  to  military  intervention.     England  sought  the  co- 
operation of  France,  but  France  declined.     She  then  pro- 
ceeded alone.     A  British  fleet  bombarded  Alexandria,   and  English 
forced  its  abandonment  by  Arabi  (July  11,  1882).     Arabi  expedition 
and  his  troops  withdrew.     England  then  sent  an  army  under  jj-surrec- 
General  Wolseley,  who  with  great  swiftness   and  precision,  tion. 
marched   from  the   Suez  Canal  westward   across   the   desert 
to   Cairo.     Wolseley   defeated  Arabi   at   Tel-el-Kebir,   Sep- 
tember 13,  1882,  and  immediately  seized  Cairo.     The  re- 
bellion collapsed.     Arabi  himself  was  captured  and  sent  to 
Ceylon. 

The  English  had  intervened  nominally  in  the  interest  of 
the  Khedive's  authority  against  his  rebel,  Arabi,  though  they 
had  not  been  asked  so  to  intervene  either  by  the  Khedive 
himself  or  by  the  Sultan  of  Turkey,  legal  sovereign  of 
Egypt,  or  by  the  powers  of  Europe.  Having  suppressed 
the  insurrection,  what  would  they  do.?     Would  they  with- 


560  THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 

draw  their  army?  The  question  was  a  difficult  one.  To 
withdraw  was,  in  the  opinion  of  the  British  ministry,  of 
which  Gladstone  was  the  head,  and  Lord  Granville  the  foreign 
secretary,  to  leave  Egypt  a  prey  to  anarchy;  to  remain 
was  certainly  to  offend  the  European  powers,  which  would 
look  upon  this  as  simply  another  piece  of  British  aggression. 
Particularly  would  such  action  be  resented  by  France,  and 
England  by  the  Sultan.  The  ministry  decided  neither  to  annex  the 
assumes  the  country  to  the  British  Empire  nor  to  proclaim  a  British 
„  ,  .  „  protectorate  over  it,  but  to  assume  the  position  of  "  adviser  " 
to  the  Khedive,  whose  power  would  nominally  remain  what 
it  had  been.  Under  British  "  advice  "  the  Khedive  would 
himself  carry  out  the  reforms  considered  necessary  for  the 
prosperity  and  welfare  of  his  country.  This  policy  was  ex- 
pressed by  Lord  Granville  in  a  diplomatic  note  sent  to  the 
various  powers  of  Europe.  "  Although,"  so  runs  the  note, 
*'  for  the  present  a  British  force  remains  in  Egypt  for  the 
preservation  of  public  tranquillity,  her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment are  desirous  of  withdrawing  it  as  soon  as  the  state  of 
the  country  and  the  organization  of  proper  means  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  Khedive's  authority  will  admit  of  it.  In 
the  meantime  the  position  in  which  her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment are  placed  towards  His  Highness  imposes  upon  them  the 
duty  of  giving  advice  with  the  object  of  securing  that  the 
order  of  things  to  be  established  shall  be  of  a  satisfactory 
character,  and  possess  the  elements  of  stability  and  progress." 
A  gloss  on  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  advice  "  was  furnished 
a  year  later  by  Lord  Granville  in  a  communication  to  the 
British  representative  in  Egypt,  Sir  Evelyn  Baring,  later 
Lord  Cromer.  "  It  should,"  wrote  Lord  Granville,  "  be 
made  clear  to  the  Egyptian  ministers  and  governors  of  prov- 
inces that  the  responsibility,  which  for  a  time  rests  on 
England,  obliges  her  Majesty's  Government  to  insist  on  the 
adoption  of  the  policy  which  they  recommend,  and  that  it 
will  be  necessary  that  those  ministers  and  governors  who  do 
not  follow  this  course  should  cease  to  hold  their  office." 


i 


GORDON  AND  THE  SOUDAN       661 

These   two   utterances   described   the   anomalous   position  The 
of  England  in  Egypt  in  1883,   and  they   still  describe  it.  English 
A  British  force  still  remains  in  Egypt,  the  "  occupation  "  ^.^^  „ 
continues,  advice  is  compulsory.     England  has  often  been 
asked  when  she  intends  to  keep  her  promise.     No  answer  has 
been  given.     She  is   ruler  in   fact,  not  in  law.     The  Dual 
Control  ended  in  1883,  and  England  began  in  earnest  the 
process  of  reconstruction  and  reform  which  has  been  pro- 
ceeding ever  since  under  the  real  guidance  of  Lord  Cromer, 
the  British  Consul-General  in  Egypt.^ 

In  intervening  in  Egypt  in  1882,  England  became  imme- 
diately involved  in  a  further  enterprise  which  ended  in  disaster 
and  humiliation.  Egypt  possessed  a  dependency  to  the 
south,  the  Soudan,  a  vast  region  comprising  chiefly  the  basin 
of  the  Upper  Nile,  a  poorly  organized  territory  with  a 
varied,  semi-civilized,  nomadic  population,  and  a  capital 
at  Khartoum.  This  province,  long  oppressed  by  Egypt, 
was  in  full  process  of  revolt.  It  found  a  chief  in  a  man 
called  the  Mahdi,  or  leader,  who  succeeded  in  arousing  the 
fierce  religious  fanaticism  of  the  Soudanese  by  claiming  to  be 
a  kind  of  Prophet  or  Messiah.  Winning  successes  over  the  loss  of 
Egyptian  troops,  he  proclaimed  a  religious  war,  the  people  ®  ou  a  , 
of  the  whole  Soudan  rallied  about  him,  and  the  result  was 
that  the  troops  were  driven  into  their  fortresses  and  there 
besieged.  Would  England  recognize  any  obligation  to  pre- 
serve the  Soudan  for  Egypt?  Gladstone,  then  prime  min- 
ister, determined  to  abandon  the  Soudan.  But  even  this 
was  a  matter  of  difficulty.  It  involved  at  least  the  rescue 
of  the  imprisoned  garrisons.  The  ministry  was  unwilling 
to  send  a  military  expedition.  It  finally  decided  to  send  out 
General  Gordon,  a  man  who  had  shown  a  remarkable  power 
in  influencing  half-civilized  races.  It  was  understood  that  , 
there  was  to  be  no  expedition.  It  was  apparently  supposed 
that  somehow  Gordon,  without  military  aid,  could  accom- 

'  Lord   Cromer   resigned   his   position   as    His   Majesty's   Agent   and 
Consul-General  in  Egypt,  in  1907. 


562  THE  PARTITION  OF  AFRICA 

plisli  the  safe  withdrawal  of  the  garrisons.  He  reached 
Khartoum,  but  found  the  danger  far  more  serious  than 
had  been  supposed,  the  rebellion  far  more  menacing.  He 
found  himself  shortly  shut  up  in  Khartoum,  surrounded 
by  frenzied  and  confident  Mahdists.  At  once  there  arose 
in  England  a  cry  for  the  relief  of  Gordon,  a  man  whose 
personality,  marked  by  heroic,  eccentric,  magnetic  qualities, 
bafflingly  contradictory,  had  seized  in  a  remarkable  degree 
the  interest,  enthusiasm,  and  imagination  of  the  English 
people.  But  the  Government  was  dilatory.  Weeks,  and 
even  months,  went  by.  Finally,  an  expedition  was  sent  out 
in  September  1884.  Pushing  forward  rapidly,  against  great 
difficulties,  it  reached  Khartoum  January  28,  1885,  only  to 
Death  of  find  the  flag  of  the  Mahdi  floating  over  it.  Only  two  days 
Gordon.  before  the  place  had  been  stormed  and  Gordon  and  eleven 

thousand  of  his  men  massacred.  Public  opinion  held  Glad- 
stone responsible,  and  as  a  result  his  ministry  was  quickly 
overthrown. 

For  the  next  decade  the  Soudan  was  left  in  the  hands 
of  the  dervishes,  completely  abandoned.  But  it  was  certain 
that  the  reconquest  of  the  provinces  would  some  day  be 
attempted.  Various  forces  contributed  to  this  end — 'the  na- 
tional honor,  the  feeling  that  Gordon  must  be  avenged,  the 
sense  of  humiliation  that  the  Egyptian  empire  had  grown 
smaller  under  English  rule,  the  conviction  that  the  power 
that  controls  the  lower  reaches  of  the  Nile  must,  for  its 
own  safety,  control  the  upper  reaches  and  the  sources,  also. 
And  another  cause  was  the  pronounced  growth  during  these 
years,  in  England  as  elsewhere,  of  the  spirit  of  imperialism, 
eager  for  an  onward  march.  In  1896  an  Anglo-Egyptian 
army  was  sent  into  the  Soudan  under  General  Kitchener. 
Building  a  railway  as  he  advanced,  in  order  properly  to 
supply  his  army,  he  progressed  "  very  slowly,  but  very 
surely."  At  the  battle  of  Omdurman,  September  2,  1898, 
Recovery  of  the  power  of  the  derv^ishes  was  completely  annihilated.  Thus 
the   Soudan,  the  Soudan  was  recovered,  but  it  was  recovered,  not  for 


EGYPT  AND  THE  BRITISH  EMPIRE        563 

Egypt,  but  for  England  and  Egypt.  The  British  and 
the  Egyptian  flags  were  both  raised  over  the  conquered  field. 
Thus  the  power  of  England  in  the  Soudan  rests  technically 
upon  a  different  basis  than  does  its  power  in  Egypt.  For 
all  practical  purposes,  however,  both  are  simply  parts  of 
the  British  Empire.  / 


CHAPTER  XXIV 
SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 

SPAIN  SINCE  1823 

Spain.  We  have  traced  the  history  of  Spain  from  the  downfall 

of  Napoleon  to  the  year  1823,  and  have  seen  the  restored 
King  Ferdinand  VII  reign  in  a  manner  so  cruel,  so  un- 
intelligent, and  tyrannical  that  the  people  rose  in  insurrec- 
tion and  insisted  upon  being  accorded  a  liberal  constitution/ 
And  we  have  seen  that  as  a  result  the  powers,  commonly 
called  the  Holy  Alliance,  intervened  in  1823  to  put  down 
this  reform  movement,  sent  a  French  army  into  the  peninsula, 
and  restored  to  Ferdinand  his  former  absolute  power.  This 
recovery   of  his   former  position   through   foreign   aid   was 

Revenge   of  followed  by   a  period   of   disgraceful   and   ruthless   revenge 
on  the  part  of  Ferdinand  upon  those  who  had  stood  out 

1823.  ^s  Liberals,  or  had  merely  been  lukewarm  toward  the  King. 

Forced  finally  by  the  energetic  remonstrances  of  the  French, 
who  had  put  him  back  upon  his  absolute  throne,  to  moderate 
the  frenzy  of  his  wrath,  he  was  obliged  to  grant  an  amnesty, 
which  proved,  however,  to  be  most  deceptive,  as  it  excepted 
from  its  operation  fifteen  different  classes.  The  royal  rage 
was  slow  in  subsiding.  Hundreds  were  executed  at  the 
order  of  courts-martial  for  the  most  trivial  acts  in  which 
there  was  the  slightest  tinge  of  liberalism,  such  as  uttering 

"  Subver-       so-called   "  subversive  "   cries,    or  possessing   a   portrait    of 

sive"  cries,  Rlego,  or  defacing  an  inscription  "Long  live  the  Absolute 
King."  Various  classes  were  carefully  watched  as  "  sus- 
pects," military  men,  lawyers,  doctors,  professors,  and  even 
veterinary  surgeons.  Universities  and  clubs,  political  and 
social,  were  closed  as  dangerous,  yet  most  of  them  were 
^See  Chapter  III. 
564 


LOSS  OF  THE  AMERICAN  COLONIES        565 

entirely  innocuous,  and  little  disposed  to  criticise  or  disturb 
the  existing  order.  The  University  of  Cervera,  for  instance, 
had  begun  an  address  to  the  monarch  with  the  reassuring 
words,  "  Far  from  us  the  dangerous  novelty  of  thinking." 
After  closing  the  universities  as  inimical  to  society,  Ferdi- 
nand endowed  a  school  of  bull-fighting  at  Seville. 

Ferdinand  VII  ruled  for  ten  years  after  his  second  restora-  loss  of  the 
tion,  and  in  the  spirit  of  unprogressive,  unenlightened  ab-  -^"i^^^can 
solutism.  His  reign  is  not  signalized  by  any  attempt  to 
improve  the  conditions  of  a  country  that  sorely  needed 
reform.  It  is  notable  mainly  for  the  loss  of  the  immense 
Spanish  empire  in  the  new  world,  and  the  rise  of  the  in- 
dependent states  of  Central  and  South  America.  Prac- 
tically nothing  remained  under  the  scepter  of  the  King  save 
Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and  the  Philippines. 

Ferdinand's  chief  interest  in  the  last  years  of  his  reign  The 

was  the  determination  of  the  succession.     He  had  no  heir,  ^^estion 

of  the 
But,   assured,   in   March   1830,   that   one   was    about   to  be  succession. 

born  to  him,  he  wished  that  the  child,  whether  son  or  daugh- 
ter, should  succeed  him.  In  the  case  of  a  daughter,  however, 
the  Salic  law  would  stand  in  the  way.  This  law  was  not  a 
native  product  of  the  evolution  of  the  Spanish  monarchy. 
For  centuries  the  laws  of  Castille  and  Leon  had  permitted 
women  to  rule,  and  one  of  the  great  figures  in  Spanish 
history  was  Isabella,  Queen  of  Castille,  the  patroness  of 
Columbus,  who,  moreover,  upon  her  death  was  succeeded  by 
her  daughter.  But  with  the  accession  of  the  Bourbon  line 
of  monarchs  the  Salic  law  was  introduced.  It  was  a  French 
Importation,  resting  oii  the  decree  of  Philip  V,  issued  in 
1713.      As  the  king  was  absolute,  his  decree  made  it  law. 

In   1789   Charles   IV   prepared   to   rescind   this   law.       A  The 

decree  was  drawn  up,  called  the  Pragmatic  Sanction,  making    '^^^^^  ^° 

■  ,  T  1     1  1  Sanction, 

the  change.     But   this   decree  was  not  published,   and  was 

known  only  to  a  few.      Forty  years  later,  in  March  1830, 

Ferdinand  VII  drew  it  forth  and  promulgated  it,  whereupon 

Don  Carlos,  his  brother,  and  the  next  in  the  line  of  succession. 


566 


SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 


if  the  Salic  law  were  not  repealed,  issued  a  public  protest 
and  announced  his  intention  to  assert  his  rights  to  the  crown 
if  the  contingency  should  arise.  In  October  1830  a  daughter, 
Isabella,  was  born. 

The  matter  now  became  the  subject  of  court  bickering 
and  intrigue,  one  faction  struggling  for  the  withdrawal  of 
the  new  decree,  the  other  for  its  maintenance.  In  1832 
the  King  fell  ill,  and,  believing  his  end  to  be  near,  and 
dominated  at  the  time  by  the  supporters  of  Don  Carlos, 
he  signed  a  paper  revoking  the  Pragmatic  Sanction,  Septem- 
ber 18,  1832.  The  King,  contrary  to  all  expectations, 
began  to  recover,  whereupon  his  sister-in-law,  aunt  of  the 
little  Isabella,  forced  her  way  to  his  bedside,  berated  him  for 
his  weakness,  had  the  decree  brought  her,  revoking  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction,  and  tore  it  up. 
Isabella  The  King  did  not  change  his  mind  again,  and  when  he 

proclaimed    died,  September  29,  1833,  his  daughter  Isabella,  three  years 

Q.1166I1 

of  age,  was  proclaimed  Queen,  with  her  mother,  Christina, 
as  Regent.  Christina  was  in  power  seven  years,  from  1833 
to  1840,  when  she  was  driven  into  exile.  During  that  time 
the  Carlist  war  and  the  political  evolution  of  the  kingdom 
constituted  the  two  chief  series  of  events. 

Don  Carlos,  true  to  his  word,  refusing  to  recognize  the 
revocation  of  the  Salic  law,  proclaimed  himself  king  im- 
mediately after  the  death  of  Ferdinand,  and  a  war  of  seven 
years  was  necessary  to  determine  whether  he  or  his  niece, 
Isabella,  should  henceforth  be  the  ruler  of  Spain.  The 
supporters  of  Isabella,  called  Christinos,  after  the  Regent 
Christina,  had  the  advantage  of  being  in  actual  possession  of 
Madrid  and  the  machinery  of  government.  They  also  con- 
trolled a  part  of  the  army.  Don  Carlos,  on  the  other  hand, 
was  supported  by  the  clergy  and  nobility,  and  all  who  be- 
lieved in  thorough-going  absolutism,  many  of  whom  consid- 
ered even  the  regime  of  the  late  Ferdinand  too  mild.  The 
war  between  these  factions  was  very  irregular  and  incoherent, 
and  is   of  little  interest.      As  neither  side  had  numerous 


The  Carlist 
War. 


SPAIN  A  CONSTITUTIONAL  MONARCHY    567 

troops  or  large  resources,  the  fighting  was  carried  on  in 
guerilla  fashion  by  small  detachments.  Local  issues  en- 
tered in  to  make  confusion   worse  confounded. 

Christina  had  no  desire  to  use  her  position  for  the  pur- 
pose of  reforming  Spain.  "  I  will  maintain  scrupulously," 
she  said  at  the  outset,  "  the  form  and  fundamental  laws 
of  the  monarchy,  admitting  none  of  the  dangerous  innova- 
tions of  which  we  already  know  too  well  the  cost.  The 
best  form  of  government  for  a  country  is  that  to  which 
it  is  accustomed."  Christina  was  an  absolutist  by  training 
and  conviction.  Yet  under  her  the  Spanish  monarchy  was 
changed  from  an  absolute  to  a  constitutional  one.  She 
saw  the  Carlists  victorious  in  the  north,  and  even  gaining 
a  part  of  old  Castille.  She  was  forced  to  appeal  to  the 
Liberals  for  support,  and  to  gain  them  was  obliged  to  grant 
the  Royal  Statute  of  1834.     This  established  a  parhament  The  Royal 

divided  into  two  bodies,  the  Chamber  of  Peers   and  the  Cham-  ,„*       ' 

1834. 
ber  of   Deputies.       The   latter   was   to   be   elected   by   the 

property  owners  for  a  term  of  three  years.  The  Chambers 
were  to  have  the  power  to  vote  taxes  and  laws.  But  the 
Government  was  to  have  sole  right  to  propose  laws.  Min- 
isters, moreover,  were  not  to  be  responsible  to  the  Chambers, 
to  rise  and  fa\\  according  to  their  will,  but  were  to  be 
responsible  to  the  monarch  alone.  The  Crown  could  sum- 
mon and  dissolve  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  but  a  year 
must  not  pass  without  a  meeting  of  Parliament.  This  statute 
resembled  the  French  Charter  of  1814.  It  granted  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  individual  liberty.  It  created  a  parliament 
which  represented  the  propertied  class,  but  whose  powers 
were  not  large.  It  marks  some  progress,  as  by  it,  by  action 
of  the  Crown  itself,  instead  of  by  action  of  revolutionists, 
as  hitherto,  Spain  became  a  constitutional  state.  The  gain, 
though  largely  nominal,  was  something.  It  did  not  satisfy 
the  Liberals,  but  it  contributed  somewhat  to  the  political 
education  of  the  country. 

The  parliamentary  history  of  Spain,  opening  in   1834, 


568  SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 

Disturbed  was  much  disturbed,  bewildering  and  unprofitable  to  follow, 
po  iticai  Ministries  changed  with  amazing  frequency,  parties  were 
more  nominal  than  real,  not  representing  bodies  of  divergent 
political  principles,  but  serving  as  masks  for  men  who  were 
eager  to  get  into  office  as  an  easy  method  of  gaining  a 
livelihood.  The  ministries  were  short;  in  twenty-five  years, 
from  1833  to  1858,  there  were  47  presidents  of  council; 
61  ministers  of  the  interior,  78  of  finance,  and  96  of  war. 

The  Liberals  were  divided  into  two  groups,  the  Moderates 
and  the  Progressists.  The  Moderates  accepted  the  Statute 
of  1834,  which  so  carefully  guarded  the  rights  of  the  mon- 
arch, and  gave  him  such  power  over  the  chambers.  But 
the  Progressists  demanded  the  far  more  liberal  Constitution 
of  1812,  which  clearly  proclaimed  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people  and  made  Parliament  more  powerful  than  the  mon- 
arch. As  the  Carlist  war  continued  unfavorable,  Christina 
ijj^g  w^as  driven  to  make  further  concessions.     The  Constitution  of 

Constitution  1837  was  accordingly  promulgated,  more  liberal  than  the 
of  1837.  Statute  of  1834,  less  liberal  than  the  Constitution  of  1812. 
The  Parliament  or  Cortes  were  henceforth  to  consist  of  a 
Senate  and  a  Congress,  the  former  to  be  appointed  for  life 
and,  under  certain  restrictions,  by  the  Crown,  the  latter  to 
be  elected  by  the  voters  for  three  years.  This  Constitution 
had  been  framed  by  a  constituent  Cortes,  whereas  the  Statute 
of  1834  was  merely  a  roj^al  decree. 

The  Carlist  war  was  finally  brought  to  a  close,  with  the 
help  of  England  and  France,  in  1840,  but  at  the  same 
time  the  Queen  Regent  was  driven  from  the  country.  Actual 
direction  of  the  government  now  fell  for  many  years  into 
the   hands    of    rival    military    leaders.       The    war   had   left 

the  army  the  strongest  force  in  the  state.     Isabella  II  was 
Isabella  II  /  .      *= 

declared  of    declared  of  age  m  1843,  and  the  government  was  carried  on 

age.  henceforth  in  her  name.     Her  reign,  which  lasted  until  1868, 

was  one,  on  the  whole,  of  reaction.     Adhering  tenaciously 

to  the  forms  of  religion,  and  to  the  principle  of  monarchical 

authority,  the  Queen  was  influenced  throughout  by  her  favor- 


OVERTHROW   OF   THE    SPANISH   BOURBONS    569 

ites,  by  a  camarilla,  and  did  not  observe  the  spirit,  and 
frequently  not  the  letter,  of  the  constitution.  Her  reign 
was  marked  by  absolutism  nearly  as  unqualified  as  that  of 
her  predecessors.  Constitutional  forms  were  used  to  cover 
arbitrary  actions.  It  was  a  period  of  short  and  weak 
ministries,  court  intrigue,  petty  politics,  a  period  little  in- 
structive. Whatever  disturbances  occurred  were  vigorously 
repressed. 

In  1861  Spain  joined  England  and  France  in  sending  The 
an  expedition  to  Mexico  to  enforce  certain  claims  upon  the  Mexican 
Mexican  government.  Spain  and  England  quickly  with- 
drew from  this  undertaking,  leaving  France  to  embark  upon 
one  of  the  most  ill-starred  enterprises  of  Napoleon  HI.  In 
1861  also  Spain  took  possession  again  of  her  former  colony 
of  San  Domingo,  only  to  relinquish  it  a  little  later  as  the 
result  of  a  revolt. 

Dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  regime,  marked,  as  it 
was,  by  arbitrariness,  by  religious  and  intellectual  intoler- 
ance, by  abuses  and  corruption,  and  by  the  scandalous  im- 
morality of  the  Queen,  increased  as  the  reign  progressed. 
The  more  liberal  politicians  and  officers  in  the  army  and 
navy,  persecuted  under  this  regime,  became  revolutionary. 
In  1865  an  insurrection  broke  out,  led  by  General  Prim.  It 
was  suppressed  and  Prim  sought  refuge  in  exile.  In  1866 
and  1867  similar  movements  occurred,  likewise  abortive. 
But  in  1868  the  issue  was  different.  More  widespread  than 
the  others,  and  more  carefully  organized,  this  revolt  re-  The  over- 
suited  in  the  flight  of  the  Queen  to  France,  and  in  the  tlirow  of 
establishment  of  a  provisional  government,  in  which  Marshal 
Serrano  and  General  Prim  were  the  leading  figures.  The 
reign  of  the  Spanish  Bourbons  was  declared  at  an  end, 
and  universal  suffrage,  religious  liberty,  and  freedom  of  the 
press  were  proclaimed  as  the  fundamental  principles  of  the 
future  constitution.      The  Society  of  Jesus  was  suppressed. 

The  Cortes  were  elected   a  little  later  by  universal  suf- 
frage, and  the  future  government  of  Spain  was  left  to  their 


570 


SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 


The 

Regency 
Marshal 
Serrano, 


Amadeo 
Savoy 
chosen 
king. 


determination.  They  drew  up  a  constitution  based  upon 
popular  sovereignty,  and  promulgated  it  in  June  1869.  They 
pronounced  in  favor  of  a  monarchy  and  against  a  republic, 
by  a  vote  of  214  to  71.  They  established  a  regency  under 
Marshal  Serrano,  to  conduct  the  government  until  a  king 
of  should  be  chosen.  This  proved  to  be  no  easy  task.  The 
queen,  Isabella  II,  abdicated  in  favor  of  her  son  Alfonso, 
but  those  in  power  were  opposed  to  any  representative  of 
the  House  of  Bourbon.  It  was  considered  necessary  that 
the  king  should  be  a  Roman  Catholic ;  that,  moreover,  he 
should  be  of  royal  blood.  Some  advocated  a  son  of  Louis 
Philippe,  others  a  Portuguese  prince.  Finally,  after  long 
negotiations,  Prince  Leopold  of  Hohenzollem  was  chosen. 
His  candidacy  is  important  in  history  as  having  been  the 
immediate  occasion  of  the  Franco-Prussian  war  of  1870. 
In  the  end  Leopold  declined  the  offer. 

At  length,  November  1870,  the  crown  was  offered  by  a 
of  vote  of  191  out  of  311,  to  Amadeo,  second  son  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  11.^  The  smallness  of  the  majority  was  ominous. 
The  new  king's  reign  was  destined  to  be  short  and  troubled. 
Landing  In  Spain  at  the  close  of  1870,  he  was  coldly  re- 
ceived. Opposition  to  him  came  from  several  sources — 
from  the  Republicans,  who  were  opposed  to  any  monarch; 
from  the  Carlists,  who  claimed  that  the  heir  of  Don  Carlos, 
brother  of  Ferdinand  VII,  was  the  lawful  king;  from  the 
supporters  of  Alfonso,  son  of  Isabella,  who  held  that  he 
was  the  legitimate  ruler.  Amadeo  was  disliked  also  for 
the  simple  reason  that  he  was  a  foreigner.  The  clergy 
attacked  him  for  his  adherence  to  constitutional  principles 
of  government.  No  strong  body  of  politicians  supported 
him.  Ministries  rose  and  fell  with  great  rapidity,  eight  in 
two  years,  one  of  them  lasting  only  seventeen  days.  Each 
change  left  the  government  more  disorganized  and  more 
unpopular.     Believing    that    the    problem    of   giving   peace 

'  Sixty-three  voted  for  a  republic;  the  other  votes  were  scattering  or 
blank. 


ABDICATION  OF  AMADEO  671 

to  Spain  was  Insoluble,  and  wearying  of  an  uneasy  crown, 
Amadeo,  In  February  1873,  resigned  his  powers  into  the  Abdication 
hands  of  the  Cortes.  In  a  letter  to  that  body  he  said,  of  Amadeo. 
"  I  realize  that  my  good  intentions  have  been  in  vain.  For 
two  long  years  have  I  worn  the  crown  of  Spain,  and  Spain 
still  lives  in  continual  strife,  departing  day  by  day  more 
widely  from  that  era  of  peace  and  prosperity  for  which 
I  have  so  ardently  yearned.  I  am  to-day  firmly  convinced 
of  the  barrenness  of  my  efforts  and  the  impossibility  of 
attaining  my  aims.  These,  deputies,  are  the  reasons  that 
move  me  to  give  back  to  the  nation,  and  in  its  name  to 
you,  the  crown  offered  me  by  the  national  suffrage,  re- 
nouncing it  for  myself,  my  children,  and  my  successors." 

The  abdication  of  Amadeo  left  the  nation  without  an 
executive.  The  ministry  necessarily  disappeared  with  the 
monarch,  whose  servant  it  was.  The  Cortes  alone  remained 
as  a  depository  of  power.  In  the  Cortes  there  were  many 
Republicans.  Feeling  that  monarchy  by  divine  right  had 
failed  in  the  person  of  Isabella  II,  and  ought  not  to  be 
restored  either  by  calling  her  or  her  son  to  the  throne,  feeling 
also  that  elective  monarchy  had  failed  in  the  person  of 
Amadeo,  they  held  that  the  only  alternative  was  the  re- 
public, that,  moreover,  it  was  the  only  form  of  government 
consistent  with  the  pi'inciple  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  people. 
The  Monarchists,  taken  by  surprise,  had  no  definite  plan. 
The  Cortes,  therefore,  proclaimed  the  Republic,  February  The  estab- 
12,  1873,  by  a  vote  of  258  to  32,  and  declared  that  the  lishment  of 
constitution  should  be  framed  by  a  convention  to  be  chosen 
especially  for  that  purpose.  Castelar,  a  prominent  Republi- 
can, speaking  of  the  fall  of  the  monarchy,  declared  that  it 
had  not  been  brought  about  by  violence.  "  No  one  destroyed 
it.  It  died  of  natural  causes.  The  monarchy  died  of  in- 
ternal decomposition.  It  died  by  the  providence  of  God. 
The  Republic  is  the  creation  of  circumstances.  It  comes 
from  a  conjuncture  of  society  and  nature  and  history." 

But  the  advent  of  the  Republic  did  not  bring  peace.     In- 


of   its 
fall. 


572  SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 

deed,  its  history  was  short  and  agitated.  European  powers, 
with  the  exception  of  Switzerland,  withdrew  their  diplo- 
matic representatives.  The  United  States  alone  recognized 
the  new  government.  The  Republic  lasted  from  February 
1873  to  the  end  of  December  1874.  It  established  a  wide 
suffrage,  proclaimed  religious  liberty  "  in  all  its  purity," 
proposed  the  complete  separation  of  the  church  and  state, 
and  voted  unanimously  for  the  immediate  emancipation  of 
slaves  in  Porto  Rico. 
The  causes  The  causes  of  its  fall  were  numerous.  The  fundamental 
one  was  that  the  Spaniards  had  had  no  long  political  train- 
ing, essential  for  efficient  self-government,  no  true  experience 
in  party  management.  The  leaders  did  not  work  together 
harmoniously.  Moreover,  the  Republicans,  once  in  power, 
immediately  fell  apart  into  various  groups,  of  which  the 
principal  were  those  who  believed  in  a  centralized  republic 
and  those  who  believed  in  a  federal  republic.  The  Federal- 
ists differed  even  among  themselves  as  to  the  size  of  the 
various  units  that  should  form  the  federation.  The  avowed 
enemies  of  the  Republic  were  numerous,  the  Monarchists, 
the  clergy,  offended  by  the  proclamation  of  religious  liberty, 
all  those  who  profited  by  the  old  regime,  and  who  resented 
the  reforms  which  were  threatened.  Also,  the  problems  that 
faced  the  new  government  increased  the  confusion.  Three 
wars  were  in  progress  during  the  brief  life  of  the  Republic — 
a  war  in  Cuba,  a  Carlist  war,  and  a  war  with  the  Federalists 
in  southern  Spain. 

Presidents  succeeded  each  other  rapidly.  Figueras  was 
in  office  four  months.  Pi  y  Margall  six  weeks,  Salmeron  and 
Castelar  for  short  periods.  Finally,  Serrano  became  prac- 
tically dictator.  The  fate  of  the  Republic  was  determined 
by  the  generals  of  the  army,  the  most  powerful  body  in 
the  country,  who   declared  in   December   1874   in   favor  of 

Alfonso,  son  of  Isabella  II.      The  Republic  fell  without  a 
Alfonso  XII  ,      ,.        .      ^      .  ,      .      ,ow(r         J 

recognized      struggle.       Alfonso,   landing   m    Spam   early   m    lo7o,   ana 

as  king.         being  received  in   Madrid  with  great   enthusiasm,   assumed 


THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  1876  573 

the  government,  promising  a  constitutional  monarchy.  The 
Carlist  war  was  brought  to  an  end  in  the  following  year. 
Thus,  six  years  after  the  dethronement  of  Isabella,  her 
son  was  welcomed  back  as  king.  Those  six  years  had  been 
characterized  by  instability  and  governmental  confusion. 
The  new  King  had  followed  his  mother  into  exile  in  1868, 
and  had  spent  the  intervening  years  in  study  in  France, 
Austria,  Switzerland,  and  England.  He  was  now  seventeen 
years  of  age.  His  reign  lasted  ten  years,  until  his  death 
in  November  1885.  In  1876  a  new  Constitution  was  voted,  The  Con- 
the  last  in  the  long  line  of  ephemeral  documents  issuing  ^^^  ^°^  ° 
during  the  century  from  either  monarch  or  Cortes  or  revolu- 
tionary junta.  Still  in  force,  the  Constitution  of  1876 
declared  the  person  of  the  king  inviolable,  created  a  re- 
sponsible ministry,  a  parliament  of  twO  chambers,  a  Con- 
gress of  Deputies,  elected  by  voters  meeting  a  property 
qualification,  and  a  Senate,  consisting  of  three  classes,  those 
sitting  in  their  own  right,  such  as  sons  of  the  king,  grandees 
of  a  certain  wealth,  admirals  of  the  navy,  archbishops,  life 
members  appointed  by  the  king,  and  elective  members,  chosen 
for  five  years  by  certain  corporations,  such  as  provincial 
legislatures  and  universities,  and  by  the  wealthier  citizens. 
The  executive  power  was  vested  in  the  king,  the  legislative 
in  the  king  and  the  parliament.  No  project  should  become 
law  unless  passed  by  both  houses.  Spain  possesses  the 
machinery  of  parliamentary  government,  ministries  rising 
and  falling  according  to  the  votes  of  parliament.  Prac- 
tically, however,  the  political  warfare  is  largely  mimic.  The 
two  chief  parties  in  1876  were  the  Conservatives,  led  by 
Canovas,  and  the  Liberals,  led  by  Sagasta.  But  they  were 
divided,  not  so  much  by  principle,  as  by  a  desire  for  office. 
Parliamentary  institutions  have  been  used  for  purposes  of 
personal  advantage  rather  than  for  the  increase  of  the 
national  well-being  through  courageous  and  intelligent  legis- 
lation. They  constitute  a  parody  on  the  parliamentary 
system. 


574  SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 

Death  of  Alfonso  XII  died  in  1885.      His  wife,  an  Austrian  prin- 

Alfonso  XII.  cess,  Maria  Christina,  was  proclaimed  regent  for  a  child 
born  a  few  months  later,  the  present  King  Alfonso  XIII. 
Maria  Christina,  during  the  sixteen  years  of  her  regency, 
confronted  many  difficulties.  Of  these  the  most  serious  was 
the  condition  of  Cuba,  Spain's  chief  colony.  An  insurrec- 
tion had  broken  out  in  that  island  in  1868,  occasioned  by 
the  gross  misgovernment  of  the  mother  country.  This  Cuban 
war  dragged  on  for  ten  years,  cost  Spain  nearly  100,000 
men  and  $200,000,000,  and  was  only  ended  in  1878  by 
means  of  lavish  bribes  and  liberal  promises  of  reform  in  the 
direction  of  self-government.  As  these  promises  were  not 
fulfilled,  and  as  the  condition  of  the  Cubans  became  more 
unendurable,  another  rebellion  broke  out  in  1895.  This 
new  war,  prosecuted  with  great  and  savage  severity  by 
Weyler,  ultimately  aroused  the  United  States  to  intervene 
The  in  the  interests   of  humanity  and  civilization.       A  war  re- 

Spanish-         suited  between  the  United  States  and  Spain  in  1898,  which 
_  proved  most  disastrous  to  the  latter.     Her  naval  power  was 

annihilated  in  the  battles  of  Santiago  and  Cavite ;  her  army 
in    Santiago   was    forced   to   surrender,    and    she   was    com- 
pelled to  sign  the  Treaty  of  Paris  of  1898,  by  which  she 
loss  of  renounced   Cuba,   Porto   Rico,   and  the  Philippine  Islands. 

'  The  Spanish   Empire,   which    at   the   opening   of   the   nine- 

the  Philip-    teenth  century  bulked  large  on  the  map  of  the  world,  com- 
pines.  prising  immense  possessions  in  America,  and  the  islands  of 

both  hemispheres,  has  disappeared.  Revolts  in  Central  and 
South  America,  beginning  when  Joseph  Napoleon  became 
King  in  1808,  and  ending  with  Cuban  independence  ninety 
years  later,  have  left  Spain  with  the  mere  shreds  of  her 
former  possessions,  Rio  de  Oro,  Rio  Muni  in  western  Africa, 
and  a  few  small  islands  off  the  African  coast.  The  Canary 
Islands  are  not  colonies  but  form  one  of  the  pro\ances  of 
the  kingdom.  The  disappearance  of  the  Spanish  colonial 
empire  is  one  of  the  most  significant  features  of  the  -nine- 
teenth century.     Once  one  of  the  great  world  powers,  Spain 


PORTUGAL  SINCE  1815  675 

is  to-day  a  state  of  inferior  rank,  a  negligible  quantity  in 

this  era  of  world  politics. 

In  1902  the  present  King,  Alfonso  XIII,  formally  assumed  Alfonso 

.        .  •  XIII 

the  reins  of  government.      He  married  m  May  1906  Princess 

o  *'  assumes 

Ena  of  Battenberg.  Profound  and  numerous  reforms  are  power, 
necessary  to  range  the  country  in  the  line  of  progress. 
Though  universal  suffrage  was  established  in  1890,  political 
conditions  and  methods  have  not  changed.  Illiteracy  is 
widespread.  Out  of  a  population  of  18,000,000  perhaps 
12,000,000  are  illiterate.  In  recent  years  attempts  have 
been  made  to  improve  this  situation ;  also  to  reduce  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  the  state.  Nothing 
important  has  yet  been  accomplished  in  this  direction. 
Public  worship  is  forbidden  to  the  members  of  any  other 
church. 

PORTUGAL,  1815-1909 

Portugal,  like  other  countries,  felt  the  full  shock  of  Na- 
poleonic   aggression.       French    armies    were    sent    into    the 
peninsula  in  1807  for  the  purpose  of  forcing  that  country 
into  the  Continental  System,  of  closing  all  Europe  to  Eng- 
lish  commerce.     The    royal    family    fled    from    Lisbon   just  Flight  of 
as  the  French  were  approaching,  and  went  to  the  capital  of  ^^^^^ 
Portugal's   leading   colony,   Brazil.       The   actual   authority  gjazil 
in  Portugal  for   several  years  was   the  English   army   and  1807. 
Lord  Beresford.      Portugal  suffered  during  this  period  the 
immense  loss  of  a  million  in  population.      After  the  fall  of 
Napoleon  the  Portuguese  hoped  for  the  return  of  the  royal 
family,  but  this  did  not  occur.     The  King,  John  VI,  was 
contented  in  Rio  de  Janeiro ;  moreover,  he  felt  that  his  de- 
parture  from  Brazil  would  be .  the   signal   for   a   rebellion 
in  that  colony,  which  would  result  in  its  independence.      The 
situation  gave  great  dissatisfaction  to  the  Portuguese,  whose 
pride  was  hurt  by  the  fact  that  they  no  longer  had  a  court 
in  Lisbon,   and  that  the  mother   country   seemed  to  be  in 
the  position  of  a  colony,  inferior  in  importance  to  Brazil. 


576 


SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 


Portuguese 
revolution 
of    1820, 


Loss  of 
Brazil. 


Moreover,  Beresford  remained  in  Portugal  after  1814,  and 
was  the  real  ruler  of  the  country.  The  relations  between  the 
Portuguese  and  the  English  were  strained  from  the  begin- 
ning. The  army  was  disaffected  because  it  was  not  promptly 
paid,  and  because  many  of  the  positions  in  it  were  held  by 
Englishmen.  An  occasion  for  the  explosion  of  the  growing 
discontent  was  furnished  by  the  Spanish  revolution  of  1820. 
Encouraged  by  the  movement  in  the  sister  state,  the  Port- 
uguese army  revolted,  and  the  Cortes  were  summoned  to 
frame  a  constitution.  This  body  adopted,  in  1822,  what 
was  practically  the  famous  Spanish  Constitution  of  1812, 
which,  as  has  been  shown,  was  largely  the  French  Con- 
stitution of  1791,  the  ideal  of  radicals  in  various  countries, 
which,  moreover,  possessed  the  advantage  of  being  ready 
made.  The  King  accepted  it,  and  Portugal,  hitherto  an 
absolute  monarchy,  became  a  constitutional  one.  The  King 
meanwhile  had  returned  from  Brazil,  leaving  his  eldest  son, 
Dom  Pedro,  as  regent  of  that  country.  In  1822  Brazil 
declared  itself  an  independent  empire,  under  Dom  Pedro  I. 
Three  years  later  its  independence  was  recognized  by 
Portugal. 

Meanwhile,  the  Portuguese  Constitution  proved  short- 
lived. As  the  absolutists  regained  control  in  Spain  in 
1823,  the  absolutists  in  Portugal  also  were  encouraged  to  at- 
tempt to  recover  their  power,  and  succeeded.  The  first  ex- 
periment in  constitutional  government  had  been  very  brief, 
but  it  resulted  in  leaving  a  constitutional  party  confronting 
an  absolutist  party. 

The  death  of  King  John  VI  in  1826  created  a  new  crisis, 
which  distracted  the  country  for  many  years.  His  eldest 
son,  Dom  Pedro,  was  Emperor  of  Brazil.  His  younger  son 
was  Dom  Miguel.  Dom  Pedro  was  lawfully  King  of  Portu- 
gal. He  opened  his  reign  as  Pedro  IV  by  granting  a  liberal 
constitutional  charter  introducing  parliamentary  government 
of  the  English  type.  Then,  not  wishing  to  return  from 
Brazil,  he  abdicated  in  favor  of  his  daughter^  Donna  Maria 


PREVALENT  DISCONTENT  IN  PORTUGAL       577 

da  Gloria.  Hoping  to  disarm  his  brother  Dom  Miguel,  who  Donna 
himself  wished  to  be  king,  he  betrothed  his  daughter,  aged  Maria  da 
seven,  to  Dom  Miguel,  decreeing  that  the  marriage  should 
be  consummated  when  Donna  Maria  became  of  age.  He 
then  appointed  Dom  Miguel  regent  for  the  little  princess. 
But  Miguel,  landing  in  Portugal  in  1828,  was  proclaimed 
king  by  the  absolutists.  He  accepted  the  crown.  His  reign 
was  odious  in  the  extreme,  characterized  by  cruelty  and 
arbitrariness,  by  a  complete  defiance  of  the  law,  of  all  per- 
sonal liberty,  by  imprisonments  and  deportations  and  execu- 
tions. Dom  Pedro  abdicated  his  position  as  Emperor  of 
Brazil,  and  returned  to  Europe  to  take  charge  of  the 
cause  of  his  daughter.  This  civil  war  between  Maria  da 
Gloria  and  Dom  JMiguel  resulted  in  the  favor  of  the  former. 
Dom  Miguel  formally  renounced  all  claims  to  the  throne 
and  left  Portugal  never  to  return  (1834). 

Maria  reigned  until  her  death  in  1853,  a  reign  rendered  Death  of 
turbulent  and  unstable  by  the  violence  of  political  struggles  Maria, 
and  by  frequent  insurrections.  In  1852  the  Charter  of 
1826,  restored  by  Maria's  government,  was  liberalized  by 
important  alterations,  with  the  result  that  various  parties 
were  satisfied,  and  political  life  under  her  successor,  Pedro 
V,  was  mild  and  orderly.  His  reign  was  uneventful. 
He  was  followed  in  1861  by  Louis  I,  and  he  in  1889  by 
Carlos  I. 

Of    recent   years    radical    parties.    Republican,    Socialist,  Recent 

have  grown  up.       Discontent  during  this   period  expressed  ^^^"^s  in 
.  &  r  f  Portugal, 

itself   by    deeds    of    violence.     The    Government    replied    by 

becoming  more  and  more  arbitrary.  The  King,  Carlos  I, 
even  assumed  to  alter  the  Charter  of  1826,  still  the  basis 
of  Portuguese  political  life,  by  mere  decree.  The  contro- 
versy between  Liberals,  Radicals,  and  Conservatives  de- 
veloped astounding  bitterness.  Parliamentary  institutions 
ceased  to  work  normally,  necessary  legislation  could  not  be 
secured.  On  February  1,  1908,  the  King  and  the  Crown 
Prince  were  assassinated  in  the  streets  of  Lisbon.     His  second 


578  SPAIN  AND  PORTUGAL 

son  succeeded,  and  is  at  present  King,  Manuel  II.  Portugal 
evidently  faces  serious  problems ;  monarchy  itself  is  in  danger. 
She  is  burdened  with  an  immense  debt,  disproportionate  to 
her  resources,  and  entailing  oppressive  taxation.  Her  edu- 
cational system  is  most  inadequate.  Her  population  is  over 
five  million.  She  has  small  colonial  possessions  in  Asia  and 
extensive  ones  in  Africa,  which  have  thus  far  proved  of  little 
value.  The  Azores  and  Madeira  are  not  colonies  but  are 
integral  parts   of  the  kingdom. 


I 


CHAPTER  XXV 
HOLLAND  AND  BELGIUM  SINCE  1830 

HOLLAND  ^ 

We  have  described  the  dismemberment  of  the  Kingdom  of  Holland, 
the  Netherlands  in  1830,  and  the  years  succeeding.  That 
kingdom,  which  included  what  we  know  as  Holland  and 
Belgium,  was  the  work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  created 
as  a  bulwark  against  France.  The  Belgians  had  revolted, 
and,  supported  in  the  end  by  some  of  the  great  powers,  had 
won  their  independence.  Since  then  there  have  been  two 
kingdoms. 

The  old  Dutch  provinces  preserved  the  name  henceforth 
of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands.  This  kingdom,  more 
frequently  called  Holland  in  English-speaking  countries, 
has  had  a  history  of  comparatively  quiet  internal  develop- 
ment, and  has  played  no  important  role  in  international 
politics.  It  has  passed  through  several  reigns,  that  of 
William  I,  from  1814  to  1840 ;  of  William  II,  from  1840  to 
1849;  of  William  III,  from  1849  to  1890,  and  of  Queen 
Wilhelmina  since  1890.  The  questions  of  greatest  prom- 
inence in  her  separate  history  have  been  those  concerning 
constitutional  liberties,  educational  policy,  and  colonial  ad- 
ministration. 

The  political  system  rested  upon  the  Fundamental  Law  The  Funda- 
granted  by  William  I  in  1815.      By  this  the  kingdom  be-  "'^^^^^ 
came  a  constitutional  monarchy,  but  a  monarchy  in  which  jgis. 
the  king  was  more  powerful  than  the  parliament,  or  States- 
General.     By   that  law,  the   States-General  were   composed 
of  two  chambers,  one  of  which   consisted  of  members   ap- 
pointed for  life  by  the  king,  the  other  of  members  chosen 
by  the  estates  of  the  provinces,  which  themselves  were  chosen 

579 


580       HOLLAND  AND  BELGIUM  SINCE  1830 

by  voters  meeting  a  certain  propert}^  qualification.  The 
legislative  power  of  the  States-General  was  restricted  to  the 
acceptance  and  rejection  of  bills  submitted  by  the  Govern- 
ment. They  had  no  powers  of  origination  or  of  amendment. 
The  budget  was  voted  for  a  period  of  years ;  the  civil  service 
was  beyond  their  control.  The  ministry  was  not  responsible 
to  them,  but  to  the  king  alone. 

Such  a  system  was  an  advance  upon  absolutism,  but  it 
left  the  king  extensive  powers,  not  easily  or  adequately  con- 
trolled, and  rendered  possible  the  personal  government  of 
William  I,  which  ended  in  the  revolt  of  the  Belgians  in 
1830.  The  Liberals  of  Holland  demanded  that  tliis  system 
should  be  radically  changed,  and  that  thenceforth  the 
emphasis  should  be  laid  upon  parliament,  and  that  parlia- 
ment should  be  brought  into  closer  connection  with  the  people. 
After  an  agitation  of  several  years  they  were  rewarded  with 
The  Con-  a  considerable  measure  of  success.  A  revision  of  the  con- 
stitution of  gi;i^;^f;iQn  ^as  made  by  a  commission  appointed  by  the  King, 
and  was  adopted  by  an  extraordinary  States-General  in 
1848,  the  general  revolutionary  tendency  of  that  time  no 
doubt  facilitating  the  change.  By  the  revised  Constitution 
of  1848  the  power  of  the  king  was  diminished,  that  of  par- 
liament greatly  increased.  The  Upper  House  was  no  longer 
to  be  appointed  by  the  monarch,  but  elected  by  the  provincial 
estates.  The  Lower  House  was  to  be  chosen  directly  by 
the  voters,  that  is,  those  who  paid  a  certain  property  tax, 
varying  according  to  locality.  The  ministers  were  made 
responsible  to  the  States-General,  which  also  acquired  the 
right  to  initiate  legislation,  to  amend  projects  submitted, 
and  to  vote  the  budget  annually.  Their  sessions  became  pub- 
lic. Later  reforms  reorganized  the  provincial  estates.  Hol- 
land is  divided  into  eleven  provinces,  each  with  its  estates. 
The  principle  at  the  basis  of  these,  of  division  into  orders, 
or  estates,  was  abolished.  They  were  henceforth  to  be 
elected  directly  by  those  who  were  entitled  to  vote  for  the 
popular  chamber  of  the  States-General.      Properly  speak- 


THE  DUTCH  COLONIES  581 

ing,  they  ceased  to  be  estates,  and  became  legislatures  in 
the  modern  sense,  though  the  old  name  was  preserved.  Since 
1848  the  constitution  has  been  subjected  to  slight  amend- 
ments,  one   of   the   more   important  being   the   enlargement  Extension 

in  1887  of  the  electorate  and  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  °^  *^^ 

f  rsmcliisc 
practically    to    householders    and    lodgers,    as    in    England. 

This  increased  the  number  of  voters  from  about  140,000 
to  about  300,000.  By  a  later  reform,  voted  in  1896,  in- 
creasing the  variety  of  property  qualifications,  the  number 
was  augmented  to  about  700,000,  or  one  for  every  seven 
inhabitants.  Universal  suffrage,  demanded  by  Socialists  and 
Liberals,  has  not  been  granted. 

The  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  possesses  extensive  The  Dutch 
colonies  in  the  East  Indies  and  the  West  Indies.  Of  these  Colonies, 
the  most  important  is  Java.  Sumatra,  Borneo,  Celebes  in 
Asia,  Cura9ao  and  Surinam  or  Dutch  Guiana  in  America, 
are  valuable  possessions.  The  Dutch  colonial  empire  has  a 
population  of  about  38,000,000,  compared  with  a  popula- 
tion of  about  6,000,000  in  the  Netherlands  themselves.  The 
colonies  are  of  great  importance  commercially,  furnishing 
tropical  commodities  in  large  quantities,  sugar,  coffee,  pepper, 
tea,  tobacco,  and  indigo. 

BELGIUM 

The  constitution  adopted  by  the  Belgians  in  1831,  at 
the  time  of  their  separation  from  Holland,  is  still  the  basis 
of  the  state.  It  established  an  hereditary  monarchy,  a 
parliament  of  two  chambers,  and  a  ministry  responsible  to 
it.  The  King,  Leopold  I,  scrupulously  observed  the  methods 
of  parliamentary  government  from  the  outset,  choosing  his 
ministers  from  the  party  having  the  majority  in  the  cham- 
bers. Leopold's  reign  lasted  from  1831  to  his  death  in 
1865.  It  was  one  of  peaceful  development.  Institutions 
essential  to  the  welfare  of  the  people  were  founded.  Though  The  reign 
the  neutrality  of  Belgium  was  guaranteed  by  the  powers,  it  °^  I-eopold 
was  nevertheless  essential  that  she  should  herself  have  force 


682       HOLLAND  AND  BELGIUM  SINCE  1830 

enough  to  maintain  her  neutrality.  The  army  was,  conse- 
quently, organized  and  put  upon  a  war  basis  of  100,000  men. 
State  universities  were  founded,  and  primary  and  secondary 
schools  were  opened  in  large  numbers.  Legislation  favorable 
to  industry  and  commerce  was  adopted.  Railroads  were 
built.  Liberty  of  religion,  of  the  press,  of  association, 
of  education,  was  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution.  Foreign 
relations  were  prudently  conducted  by  Leopold  I,  whose 
influence  with  other  rulers  of  Europe  was  great,  owing  to 
his  extensive  acquaintance  with  European  statesmen,  his 
knowledge  of  politics,  his  sureness  of  judgment.  Under  Leo- 
pold I  Belgium's  material  and  intellectual  development  was 
rapid. 
The  He  was  succeeded  in  1865  by  his  son,  Leopold  II,  who 

suffrage.  ruled  for  forty-four  years.  The  two  most  important  political 
questions  during  most  of  this  period  have  concerned  the 
suifrage  and  the  schools.  The  suffrage  was  limited  by  a 
comparatively  high  property  qualification,  with  the  result 
that  in  1890  there  were  only  about  135,000  voters  out  of 
a  population  of  six  millions.  As  the  cities  had  grown 
rapidly,  and  as  the  working  classes  were  practically  dis- 
franchised, the  demand  for  universal  suffrage  became  in- 
creasingly clamorous  until  it  could  no  longer  be  ignored. 
In  1893  the  Constitution  was  revised,  and  the  suffrage  greatly 
enlarged.  Every  man  of  twenty-five  years  of  age,  not  dis- 
qualified for  some  special  reason,  received  the  franchise.  But 
supplementary  votes  were  given  to  those  who,  in  addition 
to  the  age  qualification,  could  meet  certain  property  qualifi- 
cations. This  is  the  principle  of  plural  voting,  and  was 
designed  to  give  the  propertied  classes  more  weight  than 
they  would  have  from  numbers  alone.  It  was  provided  that 
no  voter  should  have  more  than  three  votes.  This  form 
of  suffrage  is  strongly  opposed  by  the  Socialists,  a  growing 
party  which  has  attempted  to  secure  the  recognition  of 
the  principle  of  "  one  man,  one  vote,"  but  has  not  thus  far 
been  successful. 


POLITICAL  PARTIES  IN  BELGIUM  583 

The  political  parties  of  most  importance  have  been  the  Education. 
Liberal  and  the  Catholic.     The  Catholics  have  struggled  to 
gain  sectarian  religious  instruction  in  the  schools,  and  have 
in  great  measure  succeeded.     Their  opponents  desire  unsec- 
tarian  schools. 

Belgium  is  the  most  densely  populated  country  in  Europe. 
Its  population  of  more  than  seven  millions  is  overwhelmingly 
Roman  Catholic.  It  possesses  one  colony,  the  former  Congo 
Free  State,  transformed  into  a  colony  in  1908. 

Leopold  II  died  December  17,  1909,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  nephew  Albert  I. 

// 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

SWITZERLAND 

Switzerland  in  1815  was  a  loose  confederation  of  twenty- 
two  states  or  cantons/  These  varied  greatly  in  their  forms 
of  government.  A  few  were  real  democracies,  the  people 
meeting  en  masse  at  stated  periods,  generally  in  some  mea- 
dow or  open  place,  to  enact  laws  and  to  elect  officials  to 
execute  them.  But  these  were  the  smaller  and  poorer  can- 
tons. In  others,  the  government  was  not  democratic,  but 
was  representative.  In  some  of  these  political  power  was 
practically  monopolized  by  a  group  of  important  families, 
the  patricians ;  in  others  by  the  propertied  class.  Most 
of  the  cantons,  therefore,  were  not  democratic,  but  were 
governed  by  privileged  classes.  The  central  government 
consisted  of  a  Diet,  which  really  was  a  congress  of  am- 
bassadors, who  voted  according  to  the  instructions  given 
them  by  the  cantons  that  sent  them.  In  the  language 
of  political  science,  Switzerland  was  not  a  federal  state, 
but  was  only  a  federation  of  states.      Its  constitution  was 

The  Con-       ^^^  Pact  of  1815,  which  was  the  work  of  a  convention  which 
stitution   of  .  ,  ,      ,  i  i-,         ,•  >•         i   ^  *       -i 

1815  ^^^  ^^  Zurich  and  whose  deliberations  continued  trom  April 

1814  to  August  1815.      Switzerland  did  not  have  a  capital. 

The  Diet  sat  alternately  in  three  leading  cities,  Bern,  Zurich, 

and  Lucerne. 
The  In  Swiss  institutions,  therefore,  the  emphasis  was  put  upon 

^^P°^*^^^®     the  cantons,  not  upon   the   confederation.      This  had  been 

the  case   during  the  five  hundred   years    of   Swiss   history, 

save   during   a   short   period    of   French   domination    under 

^  Three  of  these  were  divided  into  "  half-cantons,"  thus  making  in  all 
twenty-five  cantonal  governments.  A  "  half-canton  "  has  the  same  powers 
in  local  government  as  has  a  whole  canton.  In  federal  affairs,  however, 
it  has  only  half  the  weight.     Vincent,  Government  in  Switzerland,  40. 

584 


of   the 
cantons 


SWITZERLAND  IN  1815  585 

the  Directory,  and  under  Napoleon.  The  cantons  retained 
all  powers  that  were  not  expressly  granted  to  the  Diet. 
They  had  their  own  postal  systems,  their  own  coinage.  A 
person  was  a  citizen  of  a  canton,  not  of  Switzerland.  Leav- 
ing his  canton,  he  was  a  man  without  a  country.  Cantons 
might  make  commercial  treaties  with  foreign  powers.  The 
Pact  of  1815  said  nothing  about  the  usual  liberties  of  the 
press,  of  public  meeting,  of  religion.  These  matters  were, 
therefore,  left  in  the  hands  of  the  cantons,  which  legislated 
as  they  chose,  in  some  cases  very  illiberally.  Several  pos- 
sessed established  churches,  and  did  not  allow  any  others. 
Valais  did  not  permit  Protestant  worship,  Vaud  did  not 
permit  Catholic.  Education  was  entirely  a  cantonal  affair. 
Most  of  the  cantons  were  neither  democratic  nor  liberal, 
and  it  remained  for  the  future  to  accomplish  the  unification 
of  these  petty  states. 

For  about  fifteen  years  after  1815  most  of  the  cantons 
followed  generally  reactionary  policies.  Then  began  the 
period  which  the  Swiss  call  the  era  of  regeneration,  in  which  The  "Era 

the  constitutions   of  many   of  the  cantons   were  liberalized  °^  ^®' 

£r6ii6rRtioii " 
by   the   recognition   of   the   classes   hitherto   excluded    from 

power,  and  now  becoming  clamorous.  The  cantonal  govern- 
ments were  wise  enough  to  make  the  concessions  demanded, 
such  as  universal  suffrage,  freedom  of  the  press,  equality 
before  the  law,  before  discontent  appealed  to  force.  Between 
1830  and  1847  there  were  nearly  thirty  revisions  of  cantonal 
constitutions. 

The  same  party  which  demanded  liberal  cantonal  constitu- 
tions demanded  a  stronger  central  government.  This,  how- 
ever, was  not  effected  so  easily,  but  only  after  a  short  civil 
war,  the  war  of  the  Sonderhund. 

As  each  canton  possessed  control  of  religion  and  education, 
it  had  come  about  that  in  the  seven  Catholic  cantons  the 
Jesuits  had  gained  great  influence,  which  they  were  striving 
to  increase.  The  Radical  party  stood  for  liberty  of  re- 
ligion, secular  education,  a  lay  state.      It  wished  to  increase 


586  SWITZERLAND 

the  power  of  the  central  government,  so  that  It  might  impose 
its  views  upon  the  whole  confederation.  For  this  reason 
the  Catholic  cantons  were  opposed  to  any  increase  of  the  fed- 
eral power,  and  wished  to  maintain  the  authority  of  the 
cantons  untouched,  for  only  thus  could  they  maintain  their 
views.  Religious  and  political  passions  finally  rose  so  high 
that  in  18-t7  the  seven  Catholic  cantons  formed  a  special 
The  Sender-  league  (Sonderbund),  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  in- 
bund.  terests   which   they   considered   threatened.      They   regarded 

their  action  as  merely  defensive  against  possible  attack.  The 
Radicals  were,  however,  able  to  get  a  vote  through  the  Diet 
ordering  the  disbandment  of  this  league.  As  the  members  of 
the  league  refused  to  disband,  a  war  resulted  (1847).  It  was 
of  brief  duration  and  was  over  in  three  weeks.  The  victory, 
which  did  not  cost  many  lives,  was  easily  won  by  the  forces  of 
the  federal  government,  which  were  much  more  numerous  and 
better  equipped  than  those  of  the  league.  The  Sonder- 
bund was  dissolved,  the  Jesuits  were  expelled,  and  the  tri- 
umphant Radicals  proceeded  to  carry  out  their  cherished 
The  Con-  plan  of  strengthening  the  federal  government.  This  they 
stitution  of  accomplished  by  the  Constitution  of  184?8,  which  superseded 
the  Pact  of  1815.  This  constitution,  with  some  changes, 
is  still  in  force.  It  transformed  Switzerland  into  a  true 
federal  union,  resembling,  in  many  respects,  the  United 
States.  The  Diet  of  ambassadors  gave  way  to  a  represent- 
ative body  with  extensive  powers  of  legislation. 
The  The  federal  legislature  was  henceforth  to  consist  of  two 

Federal  houses :  the  National  Council,  elected  directly  by  the  people, 

ment.  °"^  member  for  every  20,000  inhabitants ;  and  the  Council 

of  States,  composed  of  two  members  for  each  canton.  In 
the  former,  population  counts ;  in  the  latter,  the  equality 
of  the  cantons  is  preserved.  The  two  bodies  sitting  to- 
gether choose  the  Federal  Tribunal,  and  also  a  committee 
of  seven,  the  Federal  Council  to  serve  as  the  executive. 
From  this  committee  of  seven  they  elect  each  year  one  who 
acts  as  its  chairman  and  whose  title  is  "  President  of  the 


EVOLUTION  OF  SWISS  DEMOCRACY        58T 

Swiss  Confederation,"  but  whose  power  is  no  greater  than 
that  of  any  of  the  other  members.  It  was  recognized  that 
there  should  be  a  single  capital,  and  Bern  was  chosen  as  such, 
on  account  of  its  position  on  the  border  of  the  German- 
and  French-speaking  districts. 

Larger  powers  were  now  given  to  the  confederation :  the  Powers  of 
control  of  foreign  affairs,  the  army,  tariffs,  the  postal  sys-     ®  lederal 
tem,  and  the  coinage.     The  cantons  retain  great  powers,  such  cantonal 
as  the  right  to  legislate  concerning  civil  and  criminal  matters,  govern- 
religion,  and  education.  ments. 

The  new  constitution  was  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the 
cantons  and  two-thirds  of  the  voters,  and  was  put  im- 
mediately into  force.  It  converted  an  ancient  league  of 
states  into  a  strong  federal  union.  It  created  for  the 
first  time  in  history  a  real  Swiss  nation.  This  is  one  of 
the  triumphs  of  the  nationalistic  spirit,  of  which  Europe 
has  seen  so  many  in  the  nineteenth  century.  It  is  also  a 
triumph  of  another  of  the  motive  forces  of  the  century, 
the  democratic  spirit.  The  reform  of  the  federal  con- 
stitution in  a  manner  satisfactory  to  the  democratic  de- 
mands of  the  time  was  only  possible  after  a  reform  in  the 
cantons  in  the  direction  of  democracy.  The  cantonal  re- 
form movement  of  the  decade  preceding  1848  was  the  con- 
dition precedent  to  the  Constitution  of  1848. 

Since  1848  Switzerland  has  pursued  a  course  of  peaceful  ^^^  ^^^^^ 
development,  but  one  of  extraordinary  interest  to  the  out-    ^  «    •+ 
side  world.      This  interest  consists  not  in  great  events,  not  land, 
in  foreign  policy,  for  Switzerland  has  constantly  preserved 
a  strict  neutrality,  but  in  the  steady  and  thoroughgoing 
evolution  of  certain  political  forms  which  may  be  of  great 
value  to  all  self-governing  countries.      There  have  been  de- 
veloped in  Switzerland  certain  processes  of  law-making  the 
most   democratic   in   character  known  to   the   world.     The 
achievement  has  been  so  remarkable,  the  process   so  unin- 
terrupted, that  it  merits  description. 

In  all  countries  calling  themselves  democratic,  the  political 


588  SWITZERLAND 

machinery  is  representative,  not  direct,  i.e.,  the  voters  do 

not  make  the  laws  themselves,  but  merely  at  certain  periods 

choose  people,  their  representatives,  who  make  them.     These 

laws  are  not  ratified  or  rej  ected  by  the  voters ;  they  never 

Important      come  before  the  voters  directly.     But  the  Swiss  have  sought, 

contribu-        ^^j-^^^   with   great   success,    to    render    the   voters   law-makers 

democratic     themselves,   and  not   the  mere   choosers   of  law-makers,  to 

govern-  ^-Pplj  the  power  of  the  democracy  to  the  national  life  at 

ment.  every  point,  and  constantly.     They  have  done  this  in  various 

ways.     Their   methods   have   been  first   worked  out   in   the 

cantons,  and  later  in  the  confederation. 

The  landes-       Some  of  the  smaller  cantons   have  from  time  immemorial 

gemeinde       j^ggj^  pure   democracies.     The  voters  have  met   together   at 

stated  times,  usually  in  the  open  air,  and  have  elected  their 

officials,  and  by  a  show  of  hands  have  voted  the  laws.     There 

are   six   such   cantons   to-day.      Such   direct   government   is 

possible,  because  these  cantons   are  small  both  in  area  and 

population.     They  are  so  small  that  no  voter  has  more  than 

fifteen  miles   to  go  to   the   voting  place,   and  most   have  a 

much   shorter   distance.     These   mass    meetings    or   Landes- 

gemeinden  are  not  unwieldy,  varying  from  2,000  to  10,000. 

But  in  the   other  cantons   this  method  does  not  prevail. 

In   them   the   people   elect    representative    assembhes,    as   in 

England  and  the  United  States,  but  they  exercise  a  control 

over  them  not  exercised  in  these  countries,  and  which  renders 

self-government   almost   as   complete   as   in   the   six   cantons 

described  above.     They  do  this  by  the  so-called  referendum 

and  initiative.     In  the  cantons  where  these  processes  are  in 

vogue  the  people  do  not,  as  in  the  Landes  gemeinde  cantons, 

come  together  in  mass  meeting  and  enact  their   own  laws. 

They  elect,  as  in  other  countries,  their  own  legislature,  which 

enacts    the    laws.     The    government    is    representative,    not 

democratic.     But  the  action  of  the  legislature  is  not  final, 

only  to  be  altered,  if  altered  at  all,  by  a  succeeding  legisla- 

The  ture.     Laws  passed  by  the  cantonal  legislature  may  or  must 

referendum,  be    referred    to   the   people    (referendum),    who    then    have 


REFERENDUM  AND  INITIATIVE  589 

the  right  to  reject  or  accept  them,  who,  in  other  words, 
become  the  law-makers,  their  legislature  being  simply  a 
kind  of  committee  to  help  them  by  suggesting  measures 
and  by  drafting  them.  The  referendum  is  of  two  kinds, 
optional  and  obligatory.  The  optional  referendum  requires 
that  a  law  must  be  submitted  to  popular  vote  if  a  certain 
number  of  the  voters  petition  for  it.  The  proportion  varies 
in  the  different  cantons,  ranging  from  a  twelfth  to  a  fifth 
of  all  the  voters.  The  obligatory  referendum  requires,  as 
the  name  implies,  that  all  laws,  or  certain  kinds  of  laws,  shall 
be  submitted  without  the  need  of  petition.  The  obligatory 
form  is  the  more  democratic,  requiring,  as  it  does,  a  direct 
popular  vote  on  every  law. 

The  initiative,  on  the  other  hand,  enables  a  certain  num-  The 
ber  of  voters  to  propose  a  law  or  a  principle  of  legislation  ^^^^^®* 
and  to  require  that  the  legislature  submit  the  proposal  to 
the  people,  even  though  it  is  itself  opposed  to  it.^  If  ratified 
the  proposal  becomes  law.  The  initiative  thus  reverses 
the  order  of  the  process.  The  impulse  to  the  making  of 
a  new  law  comes  from  the  people,  not  from  the  legislature. 
The  referendum  is  negative  and  preventative.  It  is  the 
veto  power  given  to  the  people.  The  initiative  is  positive, 
originative,  constructive.  By  these  two  processes  a  democ- 
racy makes  whatever  laws  it  pleases.  The  one  is  the  com- 
plement of  the  other.  They  do  not  abolish  legislatures, 
but  they  give  the  people  control  whenever  a  sufficient  number 
wish  to  exercise  it.  The  constitution  of  the  canton  of 
Zurich  expresses  the  relation  as  follows :  "  The  people  exer- 
cise the  law-making  power  with  the  assistance  of  the  state 
legislature."  The  legislature  is  not  the  final  law-making 
body.  The  voters  are  the  supreme  legislators.  These  two 
devices,  the  referendum  and  the  initiative,  are  intended  to 
establish,  and  do  establish,  government  of  the  people,  and  by 
the  people.      They  are  of  immense  interest  to  all  who  wish 

'  The  number  is  about  the  same,  in  proportion  to  the  whole  number  of 
voters,  as  is  required  in  the  case  of  the  optional  referendum. 


590  SWITZERLAND 

to  make  the  practice  of  democracy  correspond  to  the  theory. 
By  them  Switzerland  has  more  nearly  approached  democracy 
than  has  any  other  country. 
Spread  This  system  has  been  mainly  developed  since  1848,  though 

of  the  j^.g  beginnings  may  be  found  earlier.     Its  growth  constitutes 

,    .,  the  most  important  feature  of  Swiss  political  history  in  the 

initiative,  last  half  century.  It  has  been  adopted  wholly  or  in  part  in 
all  of  the  representative  cantons,  with  the  exception  of  Frei- 
burg. It  has  also  been  introduced  into  the  federal  govern- 
ment. In  1874  the  federal  constitution  was  revised,  and 
at  that  time  the  federal  referendum  was  established,  and 
since  1891  a  kind  of  federal  initiative  exists,  that  is,  the 
people  have  the  right  to  initiate  constitutional  amendments, 
not  ordinary  laws,  but,  as  no  sharp  line  separates  the  two, 
the  power  is  practically  unrestricted. 

The  Swiss  have  not  only  sought  by  these  devices  to  sub- 
ordinate the  representative  system  to  the  higher  will  of 
the  people,  but  they  have  at  the  same  time  sought  to  perfect 
that  system  itself  by  making  it  a  more  exact  expression 
of  that  will.  The  method  advocated  to  accomplish  this 
Proportional  is  proportional  representation,  by  which  minorities  are  given 
representa-  weight  in  legislatures  in  proportion  to  their  numbers.  This 
system  has  been  adopted  in  several  cantons,  and  its  ad- 
vocates urge  its  adoption  in  the  others,  and  in  the  con- 
federation.' 

From    being    decentralized    and    undemocratic    in    1815 

Switzerland  has  achieved  during  the  century  a  considerable 

degree  of  centralization,  and  has  become  the  most  democratic 

country  in  the  world.      It  has  made  great  progress  in  educa- 

The  tion  and  in  industry.      The  population  has  increased  over 

population     ^  million  since  1850,  and  now  numbers  about  three  and  a 

of  Switzer-  ,     .        .  , 

land.  ^'alf  millions.      This  population  is  not  homogeneous  in  race 

or  language.      About  71   per  cent,   speak  German,  21   per 

cent.  French,  5  per  cent.  Italian,  and  a  small  fraction  speak 

a    peculiar    Romance    language,    called    Roumansch.      But 

^  Vincentj  Government  in  Switzerland,  73-83. 


THE  NEUTRALITY  OF  SWITZERLAND      591 

language  is  not  a  divisive  force,  as  it  is  elsewhere,  as  it  is, 
for  example,  in  Austria-Hungary  and  in  the  Balkan  penin- 
sula, probably  because  no  political  advantages  or  disadvan- 
tages are  connected  with  it. 

The  neutrality  of  Switzerland  is  guaranteed  by  the  powers.  The 

From  this  fact,  as  well  as  from  its  central  position,  Switzer-  neutrality 

.of  Switzer- 
land  has    come   to    play    a   unique   and    nnportant    part    ni  ^^^^ 

international  affairs.  It  has  become  the  seat  of  a  number 
of  useful  international  institutions — the  Red  Cross  Society, 
whose  flag  is  the  Swiss  flag  with  colors  reversed;  the  Inter- 
national Postal  Union,  the  International  Telegraph  Union. 
It  has  also  played  an  important  role  in  the  international 
peace  movement.  It  was  in  Geneva,  in  1872,  that  the  most 
important  work  of  international  arbitration  of  the  nineteenth 
century  was  accomplished,  that  which  settled  the  controversy 
between  the  United  States  and^  Great  Britain  which  grew 
out  of  the  Alabama  claims. 


Denmark 

loses 

Norway. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 
THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 

DENMARK 

During  the  later  wars  of  Napoleon  Denmark  had  been 
his  ally,  remaining  loyal  to  the  end,  while  other  allies  had 
taken  favorable  occasion  to  abandon  him.  For  this  con- 
duct the  conquerors  of  Napoleon  punished  her  severely  by 
forcing  her  by  the  Treaty  of  Kiel,  January  1814,  to  cede 
Norway  to  Sweden,  which  had  thrown  in  its  lot  with  the  Great 
Coalition.  The  condition  of  the  Danish  kingdom  at  the 
period  of  the  opening  of  this  history  was  deplorable,  indeed. 
By  the  loss  of  Norway  her  population  was  reduced  a  third. 
Her  trade  was  ruined,  and  her  finances  were  in  the  greatest 
disorder. 

The  Government  was  an  absolute  monarchy.  Frederick 
VI  was  king  from  1808  to  1839.  Down  to  1830  there 
was  practically  no  political  activity.  The  people  were 
struggling  to  recover  some  measure  of  prosperity,  the  Gov- 
ernment was  forced  to  pursue  a  quiet  economical  policy  of 
routine  to  provide  for  the  urgent  needs  of  the  state.  The 
great  war  debt  weighed  heavily  upon  the  nation.  Not  for 
a  generation  was  it  found  possible  to  begin  to  reduce  it. 

But  after  1830  a  liberal  movement  developed  of  sufficient 
strength  to  necessitate  some  action  on  the  part  of  the  King. 
Thinking  to  quiet  it  by  mild  concessions,  he  established 
Consultative  ^^  1834  four  consultative  estates — one  for  each  of  the  prov- 
assemblies.  inces  into  which  Denmark  was  divided — the  Islands,  Jutland, 
Schleswig,  and  Holstein.  These  assemblies  were  to  be 
chosen  for  six  years  by  the  landed  proprietors,  and  were 
to  meet  biennially.  They  were  to  have  the  power  to  discuss 
laws  and  taxes,  to  present  petitions,  to  criticise  the  Govern- 

592 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  A  CONSTITUTION       593 

ment.  But  they  had  no  real  authority,  as  they  were  merely 
consultative.  The  king  might  follow  their  advice,  or  accede 
to  their  petitions,  or  not,  as  he  chose.  Their  meetings  were 
behind  closed  doors,  and  their  debates  were  not  published. 

Obviously,  such  assemblies  did  not  at  all  satisfy  the  de- 
mands of  the  Liberals,  who  desired  a  real  constitution  and  a 
real  parliament.  This  party  had  high  hopes  that  the 
succeeding  king.  Christian  VIII,  who  ruled  from  1839  to 
1848,  and  who  came  to  the  throne  with  a  reputation  for 
enlightened  and  progressive  ideas,  would  launch  Denmark 
upon  a  career  of  liberalism,  but  their  hopes  were  entirely 
disappointed.  The  agitation,  therefore,  continued,  and 
grew  so  strong  that  Christian  finally  decided  to  grant  a 
constitution,  but  he  died  before  promulgating  it. 

His    successor,    Frederick   VII,   issued   a    constitution    in  Constitu- 

June  1849,  which  was  limited  to  the  Islands  and  Jutland,    ^^^ 

granted, 
and   did  not   include   the   duchies,   Schleswig   and   Holstein. 

In   1854  Frederick  promulgated   another   constitution,   and 
in  1855  still  another.      The  difficulty  was  that  the  question 
of  a  constitution  was  bound  up  with  that  vastly  complicated 
problem  of  the  relation  of  the  duchies,  Schleswig  and  Hoi-  Schleswig- 
stein,  to  Denmark.      This  problem  of  the  duchies  dominated     °  ^  ^^"' 
Danish  politics   during  the   entire   reign   of  Frederick   VII, 
from  1848  to  1863,  never  solved,  and  always  highly  disturb- 
ing.    Under  his  successor,  Christian  IX,  who  reigned  from 
1863  to  1906,  the  problem  entered  upon  its  final  phase,  lead- 
ing, as  we  have  seen  elsewhere,  to  the  war  of  1864  between 
Denmark  on  the  one  hand    and  Prussia  and  Austria  on  the 
other.     The  result  of  that  war  was  the  loss  of  the  duchies  to 
the  two  powers  by  the  Treaty  of  Vienna,  October  30,  1864.  Treaty  of 
The  question  of  the  duchies  was  thus  settled  as  far  as  Den-     ^^""^• 
mark   was   concerned.       For   the   second   time   in   the  nine- 
teenth century  Denmark   suffered   a  dismemberment   at  the 
hands    of   the   great    military    powers.       This    reduced    her 
territorial  extent  by   a   third,   her  population  by   about   a 
million. 


594  THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 

Since  that  war  Denmark  has  pursued  a  policy  of  internal 
development,  undisturbed  by  foreign  politics.  A  constitu- 
Revision  of  tion  was  issued  in  1866,  a  revision  of  that  of  1849,  and  is 
the  Con-  ^\^[\\  \j^  force.  By  it  a  parliament  of  two  houses  was  estab- 
lished, the  Upper  House  or  Landsthing,  consisting  of  66 
members,  twelve  of  whom  are  appointed  by  the  king  for  life, 
the  others  being  chosen  by  the  large  taxpayers  for  a  term 
of  eight  years ;  and  the  Lower  House,  or  Folkething,  elected 
for  three  years  by  a  wide  suffrage.  According  to  the  con- 
stitution there  should  be  one  member  for  every  16,000 
inhabitants.  There  are,  however,  at  present  only  114 
members. 

For  many  years  Christian  IX  ruled,  relying  on  the  Upper 
House  in  defiance  of  the  wishes  of  the  Lower.  The  dispute 
was  over  army  reform  and  the  budget,  and  the  example 
followed  was  that  of  Bismarck  in  Prussia  between  1862  and 
1866.  In  the  end  the  King  was  victorious.  Constitutional 
government  during  these  years  (1873-1894)  really  existed 
Growth  of  only  in  name.  Latterly,  the  Radical  party  has  increased, 
radicalism,  ^nd  in  1901  it  gained  an  overwhelming  victory.  Recent 
legislation  has  been  along  radical  lines.  In  1891  an  old  age 
pension  system  was  established.  All  over  sixty  years,  of 
good  character,  are  entitled  to  a  pension,  half  of  which  is 
paid  by  the  state,  half  by  the  local  authority.  There  is 
no  requirement  of  previous  payments  on  the  part  of  the 
recipients,  as  there  is  in  Germany.  The  suffrage  is  pos- 
sessed by  men  of  at  least  thirty  years  of  age.  Women 
have  recently  secured  the  right  to  vote  in  city  and  town 
elections,  and  are  agitating  to  secure  the  same  right  in  na- 
tional elections.  Education  is  compulsory  between  the  ages 
of  seven  and  fourteen.  The  population  of  Denmark  is  over 
two  million  and  a  half.  The  area  is  about  that  of  Switzer- 
land. 
Denmark's  Denmark  has   extensive   possessions — Greenland,  Iceland, 

colonies.         ^^^  Faroe  Islands,  and  the  three  small  West  Indian  islands  of 
St.  Croix,  St.  Thomas,  and  St.  John.      Of  these  the  most 


RELATIONS  OF  SWEDEN  AND  NORWAY    595 

important  is  Iceland,  600  miles  west  of  Norway,  with  an 
area  of  over  40,000  square  miles  and  a  population  of  about 
80,000.  Iceland  was  granted  home  rule  in  1874,  and 
has  its  own  parliament  of  thirty-six  members.  In  1874 
Iceland  celebrated  the  thousandth  anniversary  of  its  settle- 
ment. The  Faroes  are  not  colonies,  but  paf  ts  of  the  kingdom. 
The  present  king  is  Frederick  VIII,  who  has  been  on 
the  throne  since  1906. 

SWEDEN  AND  NORWAY 

Both  Sweden  and  Norway  were  affected  by  the  course 
of  the  Napoleonic  wars.  After  the  Treaty  of  Tilsit  of 
1807,  by  which  Russia  and  France  became  alhes,  Russia 
proceeded  to  gratify  a  long  cherished  ambition  by  seizing 
Finland  from  Sweden,  thus  gaining  a  large  territory  and 
a  long  coast  line  on  the  Baltic  Sea.  Later,  Sweden,  uniting 
with  the  Allies  against  Napoleon,  was  rewarded  in  1814 
by  the  acquisition  of  Norway,  torn  from  Denmark,  which 
had  adhered  to  Napoleon  to  the  end,  and  which  was  accord- 
ingly  considered   a  proper  subject   for  punishment. 

The  Norwegians  had  not  been  consulted  in  this  transac- 
tion. They  were  regarded  as  a  negligible  quantity,  a  pas- 
sive pawn  in  the  international  game,  a  conception  that 
proved  erroneous,  for  no  sooner  did  they  hear  that  they 
were  being  handed  by  outsiders  from  Denmark  to  Sweden 
than  they  protested,  and  proceeded  to  organize  resistance. 
Claiming  that  the  Danish  King's  renunciation  of  the  crown 
of  Norway  restored  that  crown  to  themselves,  they  pro- 
ceeded to  elect  a  king  of  their  own.  May  17,  1814,  and  The  Con- 
they  adopted  a  liberal  constitution,  the  Constitution  of  jjj^g^Qj^ 
Eidsvold,  establishing  a  parliament,   or  Storthing. 

But  the  King  of  Sweden,  to  whom  this  country  had  been 
assigned  by  the  consent  of  the  powers,  did  not  propose 
to  be  deprived  of  it  by  act  of  the  Norwegians  themselves. 
He  sent  the  Crown  Prince,  Bernadotte,  into  Norway  to  take 
possession.      A  war  resulted  between  the  Swedes   and  the 


696  THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 

Norwegians,  the  latter  being  victorious.  Then  the  great 
powers  intervened  so  peremptorily  that  the  newly  elected 
Norwegian  king,  Christian,  resigned  his  cro^\Ti  into  the 
hands  of  the  Storthing.  The  Storthing  then  acquiesced 
in  the  union  with  Sweden,  but  only  after  having  formally 
elected  the  King  of  Sweden  as  the  King  of  Norway,  thus 
asserting  its  sovereignty,  and  also  after  the  King  had  prom- 
ised to  recognize  the  Constitution  of  1814,  which  the  Nor- 
wegians had  given  themselves. 

Thus  there  was  no  fusion  of  Norway  and  Sweden.     There 
Sweden  and  were  two  kingdoms   and  one  king.       The  same  person  was 
orway          King  of  Sweden  and  King  of  Norway,  but  he  governed  each 
nations  according  to  its  own  laws,  and  by  means  of  separate  min- 

tinder  the  istries.  No  Swede  could  hold  office  in  Noi'way,  no  Nor- 
same  king.  -vyregJan  in  Sweden.  Each  country  had  its  separate  constitu- 
tion, its  separate  parliament.  In  Sweden  the  parliament, 
or  Diet,  consisted  of  four  houses,  representing  respectively 
the  nobility,  the  clergy,  the  cities,  and  the  peasantry.  In 
Norway  the  parliament,  or  Storthing,  consisted  of  two  cham- 
bers. Sweden  had  a  strong  aristocracy,  Norway  only  a 
small  and  feeble  one.  Swedish  government  and  society  were 
aristocratic  and  feudal,  Norwegian  very  democratic.  Nor- 
way, indeed,  was  a  land  of  peasants,  who  owned  their  farms, 
and  fisherfolk,  sturdy,  simple,  independent.  Each  country 
had  its  own  language,  each  its  own  capital,  that  of  Sweden 
at  Stockholm,  that  of  Norway  at  Christiania. 

The  two  kingdoms,  therefore,  were  very  dissimilar,  with 
their  different  languages,  different  institutions,  and  different 
conditions.  They  had  in  common  a  king,  and  ministers  of 
war  and  foreign  affairs.  The  connection  between  the  two 
countries,  limited  as  it  was,  led  during  the  century  to  fre- 
quent and  bitter  disagreements,  ending  a  few  years  ago  in 
their  final  separation. 
The  reign  Charles    XIII,   the   ruler   in    1815,   having   no    son,   had 


of  Charles 

Bemadotte  became  king  in  1818,  and  ruled  as  Charles  XIV 


adopted  the  French  marshal,  Bernadotte,  as  Crowni  Prince. 


FRICTION  BETWEEN  NORWAY  AND  SWEDEN    597 

until  his  death  in  1844.  Under  him  only  slight  changes 
were  made  in  the  institutions  of  Sweden.  He  was  opposed 
to  reforms,  and  earnest  in  his  resistance  to  the  liberal 
parties.  In  an  economic  sense  the  prosperity  of  Sweden 
advanced  considerably.  Religious  freedom  was  established. 
The  debt  was  reduced.  But  the  King  would  not  consent 
to  the  chief  demand  of  reformers  for  a  radical  change  in 
the  antiquated  form  of  the  Diet.  Its  division  into  four 
chambers  played  directly  into  his  hands,  as  he  could  gen- 
erally oppose  one  or  two  chambers  to  the  others,  thus  him- 
self exercising  an  authority  practically  free  from  control. 
The  situation  remained  unchanged  under  his  successor,  Oscar 
I  (1844-1859).  Under  Charles  XV,  however  (1859-1872), 
this  fundamental  change  was  accomplished  by  the  constitu- 
tional laws  of  1866.  The  Diet  was  transformed  into  a  The  Con- 
modern  parliament,  consisting  of  two  chambers.  Represen-  ^^.^  ° 
tation  by  orders  was  abolished.  Henceforth,  there  was  to 
be  an  Upper  Chamber,  elected  by  communal  councils  for 
a  term  of  nine  years.  As  a  high  property  qualification 
was  required  for  membership,  and  as  members  of  this  house 
received  no  salaries,  it  really  represented  the  noble  and 
rich  classes.  The  Lower  Chamber  was  elected  for  three 
years,  but,  as  a  fairly  high  property  qualification  was  re- 
quired for  voters,  it  also  represented  property.  Indeed,  only 
about  eight  per  cent,  of  the  people  possessed  the  suffrage 
under  this  constitution.  Members  of  this  Chamber  received 
salaries.  This  system  went  into  force  in  1866,  and  remained 
in  force  until  1909. 

Under  the  next  king,  Oscar  II,  who  ruled  from  1872  to 
1907,  the  relations  with  Norway  became  acute,  ending  finally  rriction 

in  complete  rupture.     Friction  between  Norway  and  Sweden 

.  ^  ,         J,  Sweden 

has   existed   ever   since    1814,   and   has   provoked   frequent  ^^^ 

crises.       The   fundamental   cause  has   lain   in   the   different  Norway. 

conceptions    prevalent    among    the    two    peoples    as    to    the 

real  nature  of  the  union  effected  in  that  year.      The  Swedes 

have  maintained  that   Norway  was  unqualifiedly  ceded  to 


598  THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 

them  by  tlie  Treaty  of  Kiel  in  1814;  that  they  later  were 
■willing  to  recognize  that  the  Norwegians  should  have  a 
certain  amount  of  independence ;  that  they,  nevertheless,  pos- 
sessed certain  rights  in  Norway  and  preponderance  in  the 
Union.  The  Norwegians,  on  the  other  hand,  have  main- 
tained that  the  Union  rested,  not  upon  the  Treaty  of  Kiel, 
a  treaty  between  Denmark  and  Sweden,  but  upon  their 
own  act ;  that  they  had  been  independent,  and  had  drawn 
up  a  constitution  for  themselves,  the  Constitution  of  Eids- 
vold ;  that  they  had  voluntarily  united  themselves  with  Sweden 
by  freely  electing  the  King  of  Sweden  as  King  of  Norway; 
that  there  was  no  fusion  of  the  two  states ;  that  Sweden 
had  no  power  in  Norway;  that  Sweden  had  no  preponder- 
ance in  the  Union,  but  that  the  two  states  were  on  a  plane  of 
entire  equality.  With  two  such  dissimilar  views  friction 
could  not  fail  to  develop,  and  it  began  immediately  after  1814j 
on  a  question  of  trivial  importance.  The  Norwegians  in- 
sisted upon  celebrating  as  their  national  holiday  May  17th, 
the  date  of  their  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  Eidsvold. 
The  Swedes  wished  it  to  be  November  4th,  the  day  on  which 
the  King,  Charles  XIII,  accepted  and  promulgated  that  con- 
stitution. The  Norwegians  then,  in  1815,  intended  to  man- 
age their  own  internal  affairs  as  they  saw  fit,  without  any 
intermixture  of  Swedish  influence.  But  their  King  was  also 
King  of  Sweden,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  lived  in  Sweden 
most  of  the  time,  and  was  rarely  seen  in  Norway.  More- 
over, Sweden  was  in  population  much  the  larger  partner 
in  this  uncomfortable  union. 

By  the  Constitution  of  Eidsvold  the  King  had  only  a 
suspensive  veto  over  the  laws  of  the  Storthing,  the  Nor- 
wegian parliament.  Any  Maw  could  be  enacted  over  that 
veto  if  passed  by  three  successive  Storthings,  with  intervals 
of  three  years  between  the  votes.  The  process  was  slow, 
but  sufficient  to  insure  victory  in  any  cause  in  which  the 
Noi-wegians  were  in  earnest.  It  was  thus,  that,  despite  the 
King's  veto,  they  carried  through  the  abolition  of  the  Nor- 


DISSOLUTION  OF  THE  UNION  599 

weffian  nobility.       Contests  between  the  Storthing  and  the  Abolition 

•        /■  .•        i     1.-  4.1  of  Nor- 

King  of  Norway,  occurring  from  time  to  time,  over  the  ques-  ^^^^^^^ 

tion  of  the  national  flag,  of  annual  sessions,  and  other  mat-  nobility, 
ters,  kept  ahve  the  antipathy  of  the  Norwegians  to  the  Union. 
Meanwhile,  their  prosperity  increased.  Particularly  did  they 
develop  an  important  commerce.  One-fourth  of  the  mer- 
chant marine  of  the  continent  of  Europe  passed  gradually 
into  their  hands.  This  gave  rise  to  a  question  more  serious 
than  any  that  had  hitherto  arisen — that  of  the  consular 
service. 

About  1892  began  a  fateful  discussion  over  the  question 
of  the  consular  service.  The  Norwegian  Parliament  de- 
manded a  separate  consular  service  for  Norway,  to  be  con- 
ducted by  itself,  to  care  for  Norway's  commercial  interests, 
so  much  more  important  than  those  of  Sweden.  This  the 
King  would  not  grant,  on  the  ground  that  it  would  break 
up  the  Union,  that  Sweden  and  Norway  could  not  have  two 
foreign  policies.  The  conflict  thus  begun  dragged  on  for 
years,  embittering  the  relations  of  the  Norwegians  and  the 
Swedes,  and  inflaming  passions  until  in  1905  (June  7th) 
the  Norwegian  Parliament  declared  unanimously  "  that  the 
Union  with  Sweden  under  one  king  has  ceased."  The  war  Dissolution 
feeling  in  Sweden  was  strong,  but  the  Government  finally  de-  °^  *^® 
cided,  in  order  to  avoid  the  evils  of  a  conflict,  to  recognize 
the  dissolution  of  the  Union,  on  condition  that  the  question 
of  separation  should  be  submitted  to  the  people  of  Norway. 
Sweden  held  that  there  was  no  proof  that  the  Norwegian 
people  desired  this,  but  was  evidently  of  the  opinion  that 
the  whole  crisis  was  simply  the  work  of  the  Storthing.  That 
such  an  opinion  was  erroneous  was  established  by  the  vote 
on  August  13,  1905,  which  showed  over  368,000  in  favor 
of  separation  and  only  184  votes  in  opposition.  A  confer- 
ence was  then  held  at  Carlstad  to  draw  up  a  treaty  or  agree-  Treaty  of 
ment  of  dissolution.  This  agreement  provided  that  any  Carlstad. 
disputes  arising  in  the  future  between  the  two  countries, 
which  could  not  be  settled  by  direct  diplomatic  negotiations, 


600 


THE  SCANDINAVIAN  STATES 


Death  of 
Oscar  II. 


Suffrage  in 
Norway. 


should  be  referred  to  the  Hague  International  Arbitration 
Tribunal.  It  further  provided  for  the  estabhshment  of  a 
neutral  zone  along  the  frontiers  of  the  two  countries,  on 
which  no  military  fortifications  should  ever  be  erected. 

Later  in  the  year  the  Norwegians  chose  Prince  Charles 
of  Denmark,  grandson  of  the  then  King  of  Denmark,  as 
King  of  Norway.  There  was  a  strong  feeling  in  favor  of 
a  republic,  but  it  seemed  clear  that  the  election  of  a  king 
would  be  more  acceptable  to  the  monarchies  of  Europe,  and 
would  avoid  all  possibilities  of  foreign  intervention.  The 
ncAV  king  assumed  the  name  of  Haakon  VII,  thus  indicating 
the  historical  continuity  of  the  independent  kingdom  of 
Norway,  which  had  grown  up  in  the  Middle  Ages.  He  took 
up  his  residence  in  Christiania. 

On  December  8,  1907,  Oscar  II,  since  1905  King  of 
Sweden  only,  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  as  Gus- 
tavus  V. 

In  1909  Sweden  took  a  long  step  toward  democracy. 
A  franchise  reform  bill,  which  had  long  been  before  parlia- 
ment, was  finally  passed.  Manhood  suffrage  was  established 
for  the  Lower  House,  and  the  qualifications  for  election  to 
the  Upper  House  were  reduced  to  the  point  that  those  en- 
joying an  income  of  about  $1,800  a  year  are  eligible. 

In  NorAvay,  men  who  have  reached  the  age  of  twenty-five, 
and  who  have  been  residents  of  the  country  for  five  years, 
have  the  right  to  vote.  By  a  constitutional  amendment 
adopted  in  1907  the  right  to  vote  for  members  of  the  Stor- 
thing was  granted  to  women,  who  meet  the  same  qualifica- 
tions, and  who,  in  addition,  pay,  or  whose  husbands  pay, 
a  tax  upon  an  income  ranging  from  about  seventy-five  dollars 
in  the  country  to  about  one  hundred  dollars  in  cities.  About 
800,000  of  the  550,000  Norwegian  women  of  the  age  of 
twenty-five,  or  older,  thus  secured  the  suffrage.  They  had 
previously  enjoyed  the  suffrage  in  local  elections. 

Sweden  has  a  population  of  about  five  and  a  half  million; 
Norway  of  less  than  two  and  a  half  million. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

THE  DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 
AND  THE  RISE  OF  THE  BALKAN  STATES 

The  Ottoman  Empire,  although  it  had  been  for  a  long 
time  diminishing  in  size  and  in  importance,  was  still  very 
extensive  in  1815.  In  Asia  it  included  Asia  Minor,  Syria, 
the  region  of  the  Euphrates  up  to  Persia,  and  the  suzer- 
ainty of  Arabia;  in  Africa,  it  comprised  Egypt  and  the 
northern  coast  of  the  continent  as  far  as  Morocco.  In 
Europe  it  possessed  the  whole  of  the  Balkan  peninsula,  and 
north  of  the  Danube  the  principalities  of  Moldavia  and 
Wallachia.  It  stretched,  therefore,  like  a  huge  crescent 
round  the  eastern  and  southern  shores  of  the  Mediterranean 
from  the  Adriatic  nearly  to  Spain.  This  vast  empire  had 
been  for  some  time  in  danger  of  being  conquered  by  foreign 
powers.  Russia  had,  since  the  time  of  Catharine  II,  been 
pushing  her  way  southward,  by  seizing  Turkish  soiL     At  Decay 

one  time  it  seemed  as  if  Russia  and  Austria,  her  two  nearest  °^  *^® 

•   1  I  1  1    1-   •  1       1  -11  Ottoman, 

neighbors,  would  divide  the  spoils  between  them,  at  another  jij^^ire 

that  Napoleon  would  direct  his  restless  activity  thither  with 
damaging  results.  But  the  interests  of  European  politics 
had  kept  these  powers  otherwise  occupied,  and  had  frustrated 
whatever  designs  they  had  had  upon  the  Sultan's  possessions. 
But  there  was  another  menace.  The  immediate  danger  was 
not  from  without  but  from  within.  The  government  of  the 
Sultan  was  inefficient,  its  mechanism  of  control  of  its  agents 
deplorably  defective.  The  result  was  that  in  various  parts 
of  the  empire  those  agents  were  using  their  power  to  found 
for  themselves  virtually  independent  states,  with  themselves  ^^^^^y  ^^ 
and  their  children  as  the  royal  lines.  A  process  of  dis-  fligmember- 
memberment  was  going  on  in  Turkey  such  as  had  gone  on  ment. 

601 


602    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

in  Germany  in  the  Middle  Ages  under  the  feudal  system.  A 
large  but  loosely  organized  state  was  being  broken  up  by 
the  personal  cupidity  and  ambition  of  its  agents  into  small, 
compact,  and  energetic  states.  Thus  Algiers  and  Tunis  were 
only  nominally  parts  of  the  empire,  and  the  bond  of  vas- 
salage attaching  them  to  the  empire  was  not  in  1815 
recognized  by  Europe.  The  Beys  were  real  sovereigns. 
Thus,  in  Egypt,  Mehemet  Ali  was  really  founding  an  in- 
dependent monarchy,  and  his  son,  Ibrahim,  was  already 
chosen  as  his  successor.  The  process  had  even  reached 
European  Turkey,  and,  in  Albania,  Ali  of  Janina  was  en- 
deavoring to  accomplish  the  same  thing.  The  military 
system  of  the  empire,  once  the  terror  of  Europe,  was  now  in 
decay,  both  in  discipline,  in  leadership,  and  in  equipment.  The 
main  object  for  a  century  had  been  defense,  and  not  offense, 
and  even  that  was  beyond  the  competence  of  the  government. 
This  empire  rested  on  a  fundamental  principle  which,  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  was  to  prove  a  source  of  great  weakness. 
Difference  of  religious  belief  was  made  the  basis  of  the  state. 
The  population  was  divided  into  two  classes,  the  Mohamme- 
dans and  those  who  were  not  Mohammedans.  The  govern- 
ment had  never  attempted  to  fuse  the  two  elements,  but 
rather  had  always  sharply  differentiated  them.  The  Mo- 
The  ruling  hammedans  were  the  ruling  class,  and  they  were  contemptu- 
class.  Q^g  Qf  j-j-^g  others,  to  whom  they  applied  the  name  rayahs,  that 

is,  unprotected  herds  destined  only  to  serve. 

That  part  of  the  Ottoman  Empire  which  lay  in  Europe  was 
the  smallest  part  by  far,  yet  it  has  had  the  most  eventful 
history   and   has    furnished   one   of   the   most   intricate   and 
The  contentious    problems    European    statesmen    have    ever   had 

Eastern  to  consider,  the  so-called  Eastern  Question.     The  Turks  in 

their  conquest  of  southeastern  Europe  in  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries  had  subdued  many  different  races ;  the 
Greeks,  claiming  descent  from  the  Greeks  of  antiquity;  the 
Roumanians,  claiming  descent  from  Roman  colonists  of  the 
empire;  the  Albanians,  and  various  branches  of  the  great 


THE  SUBJECT  PEOPLES        603 

Slavic  race,  the  Servians,  Bulgarians,^  Bosnians,  and  Monte- 
negrins. Full  of  contempt  for  those  whom  they  had  conquered, 
the  Turks  made  no  attempt  to  assimilate  them  nor  to  fuse 
them  into  one  body  politic.     They  were  satisfied  with  reducing  Treatment 

them  to  subjection,   and  with  exploiting  them.     They  left  °^  subject 

1     •    •  peoples, 

them  in  a  kind  of  semi-mdependence  as  far  as  admmistra- 

tion  was  concerned,  allowing  them  to  retain  their  civil  laws 
and  their  local  magistrates.  These  subject  peoples  were  per- 
mitted the  free  exercise  of  their  religion  which,  for  most 
of  them,  was  the  Greek  form  of  Christianity,  but  they  were 
despised.  While  they  enjoyed  certain  privileges  they  pos- 
sessed no  rights.  Their  property  might  be  confiscated,  their 
lives  taken  in  some  moment  of  anger  or  suspicion  or  cupidity 
on  the  part  of  their  rulers.  They  were  flocks  to  be  sheared, 
rayahs,  victims  of  a  government  that  was  arbitrary,  rapa- 
cious, capricious,  and  unrestrained.  These  Christian  peoples 
were  effaced  for  several  centuries  beneath  Mussulman  oppres- 
sion. They  bore  their  ills  with  resignation  as  long  as  they 
thought  it  impossible  to  resist  the  oppression,  yet  they  never 
acquiesced  in  their  position.  The  Turks  neither  crushed  nor 
conciliated.  The  subject  peoples  kept  their  own  organiza- 
tions which  sometime  might  be  used  as  weapons.  There 
were  two  causes  always  present  which  might  at  any  moment 
bring  about  a  conflagration,  race  hatred  and  religious  animos- 
ity. There  were  other  forces,  also,  active  from  time  to  time, 
but  these  were  always  present  and  were  alone  sufficient  to 
render  the  Turkish  government  insecure.  The  decay  of  the 
Ottoman  Empire,  the  rise  of  Russia,  and  the  vast  fame  of  the 
French  Revolution  seemed  to  indicate  that  the  time  had  come 

*  The  Bulgars,  whose  name  is  perpetuated  in  that  of  the  present 
Kingdom  of  Bulgaria,  were  not  a  Slavic  people  but  a  Turanian  or  Tatar, 
akin  to  the  Magyars  and  Turks.  Crossing  to  the  south  of  the  Danube 
in  the  second  half  of  the  seventh  century,  they  conquered  a  Slavic  people 
previously  settled  there.  But  the  same  thing  happened  to  them  that 
happened  to  other  barbarian  invaders.  They  were  assimilated  by  their 
subjects,  whose  language,  moreover,  they  adopted.  In  language,  in 
religion,  in  sympathies  and  aspirations  they  are  Slavs. 


604.     DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


The  revolt 
of  the 
Servians. 


for  revolt.  The  Ser\dans  were  the  first  to  rise, — in  ISO-i 
under  Kara  George,  a  swineherd.  The  Turks  were  driven 
from  Servia  for  a  time,  but  they  regained  it  in  1813.  The 
Servians  again  arose,  and  in  1820,  Milosch  Obrenovitch,  who 
had  instigated  the  murder  of  Kara  George  in  1817,  and 
who  thus  became  leader  himself,  secured  from  the  Sultan 
the  title  of  "  Prince  of  the  Servians  of  the  Pashalik  of  Bel- 
grade." His  policj'-  henceforth  was  directed  to  the  acquisi- 
tion of  complete  autonomy  for  Servia.  Tliis,  after  long 
negotiations  and  strongly  supported  by  Russia,  he  achieved 
in  1830,  when  a  decree  of  the  Sultan  bestowed  upon  him  the 
title  of  "  Hereditary  Prince  of  the  Servians."  Thus,  after 
many  years  of  war  and  negotiations,  Servia  had  ceased  to 
be  a  mere  Turkish  province,  and  had  become  a  principality 
tributary  to  the  Sultan,  but  autonomous,  and  with  a  princely 
house  ruling  by  right  of  heredity — the  house  of  Obrenovitch 
which  had  succeeded  in  crushing  the  earlier  house  of  Kara 
George.  This  was  the  first  state  to  arise  in  the  nineteenth 
century  out  of  the  dismemberment  of  European  Turkey.  Its 
capital  was  Belgrade. 


THE  GREEK  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE 


The 

condition 
of  the 
Greeks. 


The  next  of  these  subject  peoples  to  rise  against  the  hated 
oppressor  was  the  Greeks.  The  Greeks  had  been  submerged 
by  the  Turkish  flood  but  not  destroyed.  In  the  eighteenth 
and  early  nineteenth  centuries  they  had  experienced  a  great 
reinvigoration  of  their  racial  and  national  consciousness. 
Their  condition  in  1820  was  better  than  it  had  been  for 
centuries,  their  spirit  was  higher  and  less  disposed  to  bend 
before  Turkish  arrogance,  their  prosperity  was  greater. 
There  had  occurred  in  the  eighteenth  century  a  remarkable 
intellectual  revival,  connected  with  the  restoration  and  purifi- 
cation of  the  Greek  language.  The  ancient  language  had 
become  almost  extinct  for  all  practical  purposes.  It  was 
used,    indeed,    by    the    clergy    and    by    the    learned,    but 


THE  HETAIRIA  PHILIKE  605 

the  masses  spoke  it  in  a  corrupted  form,  a  dialect  sadly 

mixed   with   all   sorts    of   extraneous    elements.      Koraes,    a 

Greek  scholar,  sought  to  purify  the  language  of  the  people 

so  that  it  would  be  possible  for  modern  Greeks  to  read  and 

understand  the  ancient  classics,  that  thus  all  might  be  bound 

together  intellectually  by  a  sense  of  the  common  inheritance 

of  a  splendid  intellectual  past.    He  was  remarkably  success-  Intellectual 

ful  so  that  it  has  been  said  that  what  Luther's  Bible  did  "'^^^*^- 

for   Germany,   Koraes's  editions   of  the   classics,  with  their 

prefaces  in  modern  Greek,  have  done  for  Greece.      By  this 

work  the  national  consciousness  of  the  people  was  greatly 

stirred    and   vivified.     This   was    shown   graphically    in   the 

single  fact  that  the  Greeks  ceased  to  call  themselves  Romans, 

Romaioi,  as  they  had  done  for  centuries,  and  began  to  call 

themselves  Hellenes  once  more. 

As  in  Italy  and  Spain  and  Germany,  disaffection  with  the 

existing  state  of  things  was  fostered  by  secret  societies.     It 

was  such  a  society,  the  Hetairia  Philike,  or  association  of  The 

friends,  that  began  the  Greek  war  of  independence.     This  ^**^^^  * 
1  •  r-        •     1     1  1  Philike, 

society  was  founded  in  1814  after  it  had  become  clear  that 

the  Congress  of  Vienna  would  do  nothing  in  behalf  of  the 
Christian  subjects  of  the  Sultan.  Its  object  was  the  ex- 
pulsion of  the  Turk  from  Europe,  and  the  re-establishment 
of  the  old  Greek  Eastern  Empire,  which  had  centuries  before 
been  overthrown  by  the  invading  Ottomans.  The  society 
relied  upon  gaining  the  support  of  Russia  because  of  Russia's 
evident  interest  in  the  downfall  of  the  Turkish  power  as  likely 
to  contribute  to  her  own  aggrandizement;  also  because  of 
religious  sympathy.  The  Russians  and  the  Greeks  belonged 
to  the  same  branch  of  Christians,  and  Russia  looked  upon 
herself,  and  was  looked  upon  by  others,  as  the  natural 
defender  of  Greek  Christians  wherever  they  might  be.  The 
Hetairia  increased  with  great  rapidity  from  1814-1820  until 
it  included  most  prominent  Greeks  whether  they  lived  in  the 
Morea,  in  the  Danubian  provinces,  in  Constantinople,  in 
Russia   or   elsewhere.     By    1820   it  was   supposed   to  have 


606    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


The  Greek 
war  of 
independ- 
ence. 


The 

ferocity 
of  the 
conflict. 


about  80,000  members.  Many  of  the  members  of  this  asso- 
ciation were  in  the  employ  of  the  Tsar,  a  fact  which  gave 
great  plausibility  to  its  assertion  that  in  the  contest  it  was 
preparing  it  would  receive  the  military  aid  of  Russia.  The 
association  collected  considerable  sums  of  money,  bought 
weapons,  and  only  waited  the  favorable  moment  for  be- 
ginning an  insurrection  against  the  Turks. 

Thus  there  was  extensive  preparation  for  the  war  which 
began  in  1821,  and  lasted  until  the  Greeks  had  achieved 
their  independence  in  1829.  During  the  first  six  years,  from 
1821-1827,  the  Greeks  fought  alone  against  the  Turks. 
This  period  was  followed  by  a  period  of  foreign  intervention. 
The  war  was  one  of  utter  atrocity  on  both  sides,  a  war  of 
extermination,  a  war  not  limited  to  the  armies.  Each  side, 
when  victorious,  murdered  large  numbers  of  non-combatants, 
men,  women,  and  children.  The  Greek  war  song,  "  The  Turk 
shall  live  no  longer,  neither  in  Morea  nor  in  the  whole  earth," 
shows  the  temper  in  which  this  people  began  its  war  of 
liberation.  During  the  first  few  weeks  they  proved  that 
this  was  intended  to  be  no  mere  lyric  but  grim  reality.  The 
Turks  who  did  not  take  refuge  in  the  garrison  towns  were 
murdered  with  their  families.  The  Turks  immediately  took 
their  revenge.  The  Greeks  in  Constantinople  were  hunted 
down  by  the  enraged  Mohammedans,  and  on  Easter  Sunday, 
1821,  the  Patriarch  or  head  of  the  Greek  Church,  a  great 
and  revered  dignitary  of  eighty  years,  was  hanged  in  his 
ecclesiastical  robes  in  front  of  the  Cathedral,  and  various 
bishops  were  also  hanged.  Nothing  could  have  more  horrified 
the  members  of  the  Greek  Church,  who  looked  upon  the 
Patriarch  as  Catholics  look  upon  the  Pope.  Nothing  could 
have  so  surely  deepened  the  ferocity  of  the  conflict.  When 
the  Greeks  later  took  Tripolitza,  hitherto  the  seat  of  Turk- 
ish government  in  the  Morea,  they  rioted  in  fearful  carnage 
for  three  days  until  few  inhabitants  were  left  alive,  and  a 
Greek  leader  could  say  "  that  as  he  rode  from  the  gateway 
to  the  citadel  his  horse's  hoofs  never  touched  the  ground." 


GREEK  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE  607 

The  Turks  replied  by  the  blood-curdling  massacre  of  Chios, 

whose  inhabitants  had  long  been  favorably  known  for  their 

culture,  prosperity,  and  happiness.     The  statistics  are  but 

rough,  but  it  is  said  that  out  of  90,000  inhabitants,  23,000 

were  massacred,  and  43,000  sold  as  slaves. 

The  war  continued,  ineffectually  prosecuted  by  Turkey,  Factional 

which  seemed  at  certain  moments  likely  to  crush  the  rebels  ^"^"^  ^ 

among 

completely,  only  to  fail  to  do  so  by  its  own  mcompetence.  ^j^g  Greeks. 
This  period  was  made  still  more  wretched  by  the  inability 
of  the  Greeks  to  work  together  harmoniously.  Torn  by 
violent  factional  quarrels,  they  were  unable  to  gain  any  pro- 
nounced advantage.  On  the  other  hand,  Turkey,  unable 
to  conquer  by  her  own  force,  called  upon  the  Pasha  of  Egypt, 
Mehemet  Ali,  for  aid.  This  ruler  had  built  up  a  strong, 
discipHned  army,  well-equipped  and  trained  in  European 
methods,  a  force  far  superior  to  any  which  the  Sultan  or  the 
Greeks  possessed.  Under  Ibrahim,  the  Pasha's  son,  an 
Egyptian  army  of  11,000  landed  in  the  Morea  early  in 
1825,  and  began  a  war  of  extermination.  The  Morea  was 
rapidly  conquered.  The  fall  of  Missolonghi  after  a  remark- 
able siege  lasting  about  a  year  (April  1825-April  1826), 
with  the  loss  of  almost  all  the  inhabitants,  and  the  capture 
the  following  year  of  Athens  and  the  Acropolis,  seemed  to 
have  completed  the  subjugation  of  Greece.  Few  places  re- 
mained to  be  seized. 

From  the  extremity  of  their  misfortune  the  Greeks  were  Foreign 
rescued  by  the  decision  of  foreign  powers  finally  to  intervene. 
The  sympathy  of  cultivated  people  had,  from  the  first,  been 
aroused  for  the  country  which  had  given  intellectual  freedom 
and  distinction  to  the  world,  this  Mother  of  the  Arts,  which 
was  now  making  an  heroic  and  romantic  struggle  for  an 
independent  and  worthy  life  of  her  own.  Everywhere  Phil- 
hellenic Societies  were  formed  under  this  inspiration  of  the 
memories  of  Ancient  Greece.  These  societies,  founded  in 
France,  Germany,  Switzerland,  England  and  the  United 
States,  sought  to  aid  the  insurgents  by  sending  money,  arms. 


608    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

and  volunteers,  and  by  bringing  pressure  to  bear  upon  the 
governments  to  intervene.  Many  men  from  western  Europe 
joined  the  Greek  armies.  The  most  illustrious  of  these  was 
Lord  Byron,  who  gave  his  life  for  the  idea  of  a  free  Greece, 
dying  of  fever  at  Missolonghi  in  1824.  As  Greek  fortunes 
waned  this  movement  became  more  vigorous.  The  new  king 
of  Bavaria,  Louis  I,  sent  money  and  numerous  officers.  In 
France,  Lafayette,  Chateaubriand  and  others  worked  pas- 
sionately for  the  Greek  cause.  Money,  soldiers,  arms,  cloth- 
ing were  sent  in  abundance  by  these  volunteer  societies  of 
the  west.  Yet  all  this  would  have  been  insufficient  to  rescue 
Greece  had  not  the  monarchs  of  Europe  brought  the  immense 
authority  and  power  of  their  governments  to  bear  upon  the 
problem.  Year  after  year  the  governments  had  refused  to 
move.  Metternich  was  no  more  a  friend  of  revolution  against 
the  infidel  Sultan  than  of  revolution  against  the  Holy  Alli- 
ance. He  wished  to  leave  the  Christians  of  Turkey  to  their 
fate,  to  let  this  revolt  burn  itself  out  "  beyond  the  pale  of 
civilization."  "  Three  or  four  hundred  thousand  individuals 
hanged,  butchered,  impaled  down  there,  hardl}'  count,"  he  is 
reported  to  have  said,  and  for  several  years  he  was  able  to 
prevent  the  Greeks  from  receiving  the  aid  of  any  foreign 
government.  But  the  Greeks,  by  holding  out  against  all 
odds,  gave  time  for  changes  to  occur  in  the  attitude  of  other 
countries. 
Why  England's  foreign  policy  finally  came  under  the  direction 

England         q£  Canning,  a  firm  friend  of  liberty  abroad.     Canning  was 
intervened* 

opposed  to  the  principles  of  the  Holy  Alliance.     He  also 

believed  in  the  ultimate  achievement  of  Greek  independence, 
and  he  preferred  to  have  the  Greeks  friendly  to  England 
rather  than  hostile.  He  also  wished  the  preservation  of  the 
Turkish  Empire  as  a  bulwark  against  Russia  in  Eastern 
affairs.  He  did  not  wish  Russia  to  intervene  alone,  and  help 
the  Greeks  to  independence,  thus  thereafter  having  the  sup- 
port of  the  new  state.  He  was  also  influenced  by  the  fact 
that  English  bankers  had  made  heavy  loans  to  the  Greeks. 


FOREIGN  INTERVENTION  609 

It  would  be  wise  for  England  to  interfere  and  bring  this 

tangled  question  to  a  close  favorable  to  her  interests  rather 

than  to  leave  it  to  further  hazard. 

In  Russia  there  was  a  change  of  monarchs.     Alexander  I  Why 

died  in  1825,  and  was  succeeded  by  Nicholas  I.     The  new     ^^^^^ 

.  intervened, 

monarch  did  not  consider  himself  bound  to  the  policy  of  the 

Holy  Alliance.  As  soon  as  he  saw  England  likely  to  take 
a  hand  in  the  Eastern  Question  his  interest  was  not  to  let 
her  do  it  alone.  Ought  England  to  be  permitted  to  pre- 
empt the  favor  of  the  Greeks  which  they  had  been  only  too 
willing  all  along  to  give  to  Russia.''  Nicholas  was  indignant 
at  the  prospect.  Furthermore,  the  public  opinion  of  Russia 
was  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  intervention  to  save  the 
Greeks.  The  motive  was  not  the  same  as  in  the  western  coun- 
tries,— the  desire  to  extend  human  liberty — the  memory  of 
Ancient  Greece.  The  motive  with  the  Russian  masses  was 
religious,  a  desire  to  prevent  the  Infidel  of  Constantinople 
from  longer  oppressing  the  members  of  the  Orthodox  Church 
to  which  they  themselves  belonged. 

In  France  all  parties,  liberal  and  conservative,  were  united  Why 

in  favor  of  the  Greeks, — the  liberals  because  of  the  prospect     ^^^^^  '^^' 

.  .  .       tervened. 

of  creatmg  a  new  free  state  ni  Europe,  and  thus  helpmg 

undermine  the  Holy  Alliance,  the  royalists  because  they 
remembered  the  part  the  monarchy  had  played  centuries 
before  under  Saint  Louis  in  the  Crusades  against  the  infidels. 
Politicians  also  believed  that  here  was  a  chance  to  raise 
the  prestige  of  France  in  international  affairs  by  the  humilia- 
tion of  Austria  which  would  be  one  of  the  results. 

Out  of  all  these  motives  arose  the  Treaty  of  London  of  Treaty  of 
1827.  By  this  treaty  the  three  powers,  England,  Russia  ^°^^°^- 
and  France,  on  the  ground  that  the  conflict  was  of  general 
concern  owing  to  the  injuries  inflicted  upon  commerce,  agreed 
to  demand  an  armistice  of  Mahmud  II  and  his  consent  to 
the  erection  of  Greece  as  an  autonomous  state  under  Turkish 
sovereignty,  to  be  therefore  practically  in  the  same  situ- 
ation as  Servia.     The  Sultan  indignantly  refused  the  arm- 


610    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


The 

battle  of 
Navarino. 


War 

between 
Eussia 
and 
Turkey. 


istice.  The  three  admirals  of  the  allied  fleet  presented  an 
ultimatum  to  Ibrahim,  which  was  rejected.  The  consequence 
was  a  naval  battle  at  Navarino,  October  20,  1827,  a  battle 
which  arose  accidentally,  but  which  ended  in  the  destruction 
of  the  Turco-Egyptian  fleet.  The  issue  of  Navarino  was 
not  the  independence  of  Greece.  The  Allies  had  not  in- 
tended to  fight  a  battle  with  Turkey,  but  only  to  force 
an  armistice  upon  the  combatants,  and  then  to  compel  recog- 
nition of  the  autonomy  of  Greece  under  the  suzerainty  of 
the  Sultan.  The  eff"ect  of  the  battle  was  greatly  to  en- 
courage the  Greeks,  to  delight  the  liberals  throughout 
Europe,  but  to  exasperate  the  Turks  to  a  point  where 
they  lost  all  prudence.  The  Sultan  demanded  that  the  allied 
powers  make  ample  reparation  for  the  indignity  and  the 
damage  which  they  had  inflicted  upon  him  while  they  pre- 
tended to  be  at  peace.  This  was  refused,  though  the  new 
English  ministry.  Canning  having  recently  died,  shortly  pro- 
nounced the  battle  of  Navarino  an  "  untoward  event."  The 
recriminations  became  so  heated  that  the  ambassadors  of  the 
Allies  left  Constantinople.  The  Allies  could  agree  upon  no 
definite  policy  immediately  after  Navarino.  England  re- 
fused reparation  yet  regretted  the  incident  because  it  seemed 
to  her  that  by  weakening  the  power  of  the  Sultan  she 
was  playing  directly  into  the  hands  of  Russia.  Eng- 
land's policy  was  hesitating,  cloudy,  and  unwise.  She 
made  no  attempt  to  impose  the  Treaty  of  London,  and  let 
matters  drift. 

Meanwhile,  the  Sultan,  losing  his  self-control,  called 
upon  the  faithful  in  a  violent  manifesto  to  take  part  in  a 
holy  war.  This  manifesto  named  Russia  as  the  cause  of 
the  whole  insurrection,  and  was  full  of  venom.  Russia  de- 
sired nothing  better  than  a  war  with  Turkey,  which  she  forth- 
with declared  April  26,  1828. 

This  Russo-Turkish  war  lasted  over  a  year.  In  the  first 
campaign  the  Russians  were  unsuccessful,  but,  redoubling 
their  eff'orts,  and  under  better  leadership,  they  crossed  the 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GREECE  611 

Balkans,  and  marched  rapidly  toward  Constantinople.  The 
French  meanwhile  had  sent  an  army  into  the  Morea,  and  had 
forced  the  Egyptian  troops  to  leave  the  country  and  sail 
for  Egypt.  The  Sultan  was  obliged  to  yield  and  the 
Treaty  of  Adrianople  was  signed  with  Russia  September 
14,  1829. 

As  the  outcome  of  this  series  of  events  Greece  became  a  Creation 
kingdom,  entirely  independent  of  Turkey,  its  independence  ^.     ^ 
guaranteed    by    the    three    powers,    Russia,    England,    and  ^f  Greece. 
France.     Russia   gained    a    slight   increase    of    territory    in 
Asia,  none  in  Europe.     The  Danubian  principalities,  Mol- 
davia  and   Wallachia,   were   made   practically,   though  not 
nominally,    independent.     The    Sultan's    power    in    Europe 
was  therefore  considerably  reduced.     In  1833,  Otto,  a  lad 
of  seventeen,  second  son  of  King  Louis  I  of  Bavaria,  became 
the  first  King  of  Greece.     A  new  Christian  state  had  been 
created  in  southeastern  Europe. 

THE  CRIMEAN  WAR 

Russia  emerged  from  the  Turkish  war  with  increased 
prestige  and  power.  It  had  been  her  campaign  of  1829 
that  had  brought  the  Sultan  to  terms.  Greece  had  become 
independent,  and  was  more  grateful  to  her  than  to  the  other 
powers.  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  still  nominally  a  part  The  Prin- 
of  Turkey,  were  practically  free  of  Turkish  control,  and  ^ 
Russian  influence  in  them  was  henceforth  paramount.  Sev- 
eral years  later  Russia  was  emboldened  to  attempt  to  extend 
her  influence  still  further,  and  this  attempt  precipitated  a 
reopening  of  the  Eastern  Question,  and  the  first  great 
European  war  since  the  fall  of  Napoleon  I. 

Early  in  1853  Nicholas  I,  of  Russia,  judging  the  moment  Ambitions 
opportune,  suggested  to  the  English  Government  that  the 
Turkish  Empire  was  about  to  fall,  and  that  it  would  be  well 
for  England  and  Russia  to  agree  on  the  disposal  of  the 
property.  "  When  we  are  agreed,"  he  said,  "  I  am  quite 
without  anxiety  as  to  the  rest  of  Europe;  it  is  immaterial 


612    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


The  Holy 
Places. 


War 
between 
Eussia  and 
Turkey. 


what  others  may  think  or  do."  He  referred  to  the  Turkish 
Empire  as  a  sick  man,  a  very  sick  man.  The  collapse  of 
the  Empire  he  felt  to  be  imminent.  It  would  be  wise  for 
the  two  powers  most  interested  to  arrange  the  division 
of  the  estate  at  once.  He  suggested  that  the  European  ter- 
ritories might  be  made  into  independent  states,  over  which 
presumably  Russia  would  have  control;  that  England  might 
have  Egypt  and  the  island  of  Crete,  thus  safeguarding  her 
route  to  India;  he  himself  disclaimed  any  idea  of  adding 
Constantinople  to  his  dominions.  The  English  Government 
declined  to  enter  into  a  consideration  of  the  plan,  and  noth- 
ing came  of  this  suggestion  of  the  division  of  Turkey. 

For  some  time  a  quarrel  had  been  going  on  between  France, 
Russia,  and  Turkey,  concerning  the  control  of  the  "  holy 
places  "  in  Palestine,  places  connected  with  the  birth  and 
life  of  Christ,  and  therefore  of  interest  to  Christians,  par- 
ticularly Roman  Catholic  and  Greek,  who  were  in  the  habit 
of  making  pilgrimages  thither.  This  matter  was  finally 
arranged  by  negotiation,  but  the  very  day  after  the  settlement 
of  this  dispute  Russia  peremptorily  put  forth  a  new  demand 
upon  the  Sultan,  namely  the  right  of  protection  over  all 
Greek  Christians  living  in  the  Turkish  Empire,  of  whom 
there  were  several  millions.  The  demand  was  loosely  ex- 
pressed and  might  possibly,  if  granted,  grow  into  a  constant 
right  of  intervention  by  Russia  in  the  internal  affairs  of 
Turkey,  that  country  consequently  being  reduced  to  a  kind 
of  vassalage  to  the  former.  This,  at  any  rate,  was  the 
assertion  of  Turkey.  The  Sultan  submitted  this  demand 
to  the  French  and  English  Governments,  which  advised  him 
to  decline  it.  At  once  Russia  sent  troops  into  the  Danubian 
Principalities,  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  Turkish  provinces, 
in  order  to.  enforce  the  compliance  of  the  Sultan  (June  1853). 
The  Sultan  demanded  that  the  Russians  withdraw  from  the 
Principalities.  The  demand  was  rejected,  and  war  there- 
fore existed  between  the  two  powers,  Russia  and  Turkey. 
Nicholas  expected  that  the  war  would  be  limited  to   these 


COALITION  AGAINST  RUSSIA  613 

two.  In  this  he  was  shortly  undeceived,  for  England  and 
France,  and  later  Piedmont,  came  to  the  support  of  the 
Turks,  and  the  first  general  European  war  since  Napoleon's 
fall  began.  Russia  found  herself  at  war  ultimately  with  four 
powers  instead  of  with  one. 

The   motives   that   brought   about   this    coalition    against  Coalition 

Russia  are  important.     Englishmen  looked  upon  Russia  as  a&amst 
•  1.        ■  1  mi  Russia, 

a  strong  power  trynig  to  maltreat  a  weak  one.  Iney  re- 
membered that  Russia  had  been  the  bulwark  of  conservatism 
in  1848  and  1849,  that  she  had  intervened  to  put  down  the 
Hungarians,  no  subjects  of  hers,  who  had  almost  won  their 
independence.  Many  Englishmen  were  tired  of  the  long 
peace  and  ready  for  a  war.  War  feeling  was  strong  among 
both  Conservatives  and  Liberals.  Lord  Palmerston,  a  prom- 
inent member  of  the  Cabinet,  desired  it.  A  long-standing 
dread  of  Russian  expansion  into  regions  too  near  the  route 
to  India  also  influenced  the  opinion  of  Englishmen.  The 
French  Emperor,  Napoleon  III,  was  inclined  to  war  for 
several  reasons.  He  had  a  personal  grudge  against  Nich- 
olas I,  who,  forced  to  recognize  him  as  Emperor  in  1852, 
had  sulkily  addressed  him  at  that  time,  not  in  the  form 
usual  among  rulers,  of  "  My  Brother,"  but  in  the  absurd 
phrase,  in  this  case  really  insulting,  of  "  My  Dear  Friend." 
Moreover,  the  treaties  of  1815  were  in  the  main  still  intact 
and  were  a  striking  memorial  of  the  downfall  of  the  Great 
Emperor.  To  destroy  these  treaties,  and,  if  possible,  to 
requite  the  humiliation  of  Moscow,  would  be  a  sweet  revenge, 
and  to  throw  military  glory  over  his  newly  and  trickily  won 
throne  would  be  a  manifest  advantage  and  a  real  pleasure. 
Piedmont  joined  the  coalition  in  1855  for  reasons  indicated  PiedMioB*i 

above,  hoping  to  win  an  influential  friend  for  the  national-  J°^^^  ^^® 
.     .  ,  .  .  „  coalition, 

istic  ambitions  of  Cavour. 

France   and   England   joined   Turkey   in   demanding   the 

withdrawal  of  Russian  troops  from  the  Principalities.     The 

demand  was   refused  by   the  Tsar.     The   two  powers   then 

concluded  a  treaty  with  Turkey,  promising  military  support. 


6U    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


Invasion 
of  the 
Crimea. 


The 

siege  of 
Sebastopol. 


and  engaging  not  to  make  a  separate  treaty.  On  March  27, 
185J*,  they  declared  war  upon  Russia. 

The  Turks  meanwhile  had  been  fighting  the  Russians  in 
the  region  of  the  Danube.  The  French  and  English  now 
joined  them.  After  a  confused  campaign  the  Russians  were 
defeated  and  forced  back  over  the  Danube,  and,  in  June 
and  July  1854,  they  withdrew  entirely  from  the  Principalities. 
The  cause  of  the  war  was  thus  removed.  England  and 
France  had  demanded  the  evacuation  of  the  Principalities. 
They  were  now  evacuated.  But  England  and  France  had 
ulterior  purposes,  and  consequently  the  war  continued. 
They  desired  to  humiliate  Russia,  to  weaken  her  decisively, 
to  prevent  her  definitely  from  increasing  her  power  in  south- 
eastern Europe.  Thinking  to  do  this  most  completely,  they 
invaded  the  Crimea,  a  peninsula  in  southern  Russia,  jutting 
out  into  the  Black  Sea  (September  1854).  The  importance 
of  the  Crimea  lay  in  the  fact  that  Russia  had  constructed 
there,  at  Sebastopol,  a  great  naval  arsenal,  and  that  the 
Russian  navy  was^there.  To  seize  Sebastopol,  to  sink  the 
fleet  would  destroy  Russia's  naval  power  for  many  years,  and 
thus  remove  the  weapon  with  which  she  could  seriously  menace 
Turkey. 

The  siege  of  Sebastopol  was  the  chief  feature  of  the 
Crimean  war.  That  siege  lasted  eleven  months.  Defended 
in  a  masterly  fashion  by  Todleben,  the  Russian  engineer, 
and  the  only  military  hero  of  the  first  order  that  the  war 
developed,  Sebastopol  finally  fell  after  a  murderous  bom- 
bardment on  September  8,  1855.  Parts  of  tliis  campaign, 
subsidiary  to  the  siege,  were  the  battles  of  the  Alma,  of 
Balaklava,  rendered  forever  memorable  by  the  splendid 
charges  of  the  heavy  and  light  brigades,  and  of  Inkermann, 
full  of  stirring  and  heroic  incident.  The  Allies  suffered 
fearfully  from  the  weather,  the  bitter  cold,  the  breakdo^vn 
of  the  commissary  department,  and  the  shocking  inefficiency 
of  the  medical  and  hospital  service.  These  deficiencies  were 
remedied  in  time,  but  only  after  a  terrible  loss  of  life.     The 


END  OF  THE  CRIMEAN  WAR  615 

Russians  suffered  from  the  absence  of  roads  and  from  the 
corruption  of  officials,  as  well  as  from  the  weather.  It  took 
a  month  for  soldiers  to  come  the  hundred  and  twenty  miles 
from  the  northern  point  of  the  Crimean  peninsula  to  Sebas- 
topol.  Tens  of  thousands  of  soldiers  perished  on  the  march 
from  the  various  Russian  cities  southward. 

Early  in  1855  (March  2),  Nicholas  I  died,  bitterly  dis- 
appointed at  the  failure  of  his  plans.  Throughout  the  sum- 
mer of  1855  the  state  of  Sebastopol  grew  steadily  worse. 
The  number  of  the  killed  was  appalling,  over  a  thousand 
a  day.  It  was  said  by  one  of  the  victims  of  this  siege 
"  that  statesmen  who  make  wars  lightly  should  be  taken  to 
see  the  hospital  for  incurable  cases  at  Sebastopol."  During 
the  last  twenty-eight  days  of  the  siege  over  a  million  and  a 
half  of  projectiles  were  thrown  into  the  place.  The  French 
excavations  were  over  fifty  miles  in  length.  The  long  agony 
drew  to  a  close,  and  on  September  8,  1855,  Sebastopol  fell  ^^^^  °^ 
after  a  siege  of  336  days,  a  siege  which  cost  Russia  probably 
250,000  lives,  and  an  expenditure  far  out  of  proportion 
to  her  resources. 

The  war  dragged  on  for  some  weeks  longer,  but  as  most 

of  the  powers  were  anxious  for  peace,  they  agreed  to  enter 

the  Congress  of  Paris,  which  met  February  25,  1856,  and  Treaty  of 

P&ris 

which,   after  a  month's   deliberation,   signed  the  Treaty  of 

Paris,  March  30,  1856.  The  treaty  provided  that  the  Black 
Sea  should  henceforth  be  neutralized,  that  it  should  not  be 
open  to  vessels  of  war,  even  of  those  countries  bordering  on 
it,  Russia  and  Turkey,  and  that  no  arsenals  should  be 
established  or  maintained  on  its  shores.  Its  waters  were  to 
be  open  to  the  merchant  ships  of  every  nation.  The  naviga- 
tion of  the  Danube  was  declared  free.  The  Russian  pro- 
tectorate over  Moldavia  and  Wallachia  was  abolished,  and 
they  were  declared  independent  under  the  suzerainty  of 
the  Porte.  Russia  was  pushed  back  from  all  contact  with 
the  Danube  by  the  cession  of  a  small  part  of  Bessarabia  to 
Moldavia.     The  most  important  clause  was  that  by  which. 


616     DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


Turkey- 
admitted 
to  the 
European 
Concert. 


Results 
of  the 
Crimean 
War. 


the  powers  admitted  Turkey  to  the  European  Concert,  from 
which  she  had  been  previously  excluded,  by  which  they  also 
recognized  and  guaranteed  the  independence  and  territorial 
integrity  of  that  country,  and  renounced  all  claim  on  their 
part,  separately  or  collectively,  to  intervene  in  her  internal 
affairs.  This  action  was  taken,  it  was  said,  because  the 
Sultan  had,  "  in  his  constant  solicitude  for  the  welfare  of 
his  subjects,  issued  a  firman  recording  his  generous  in- 
tentions towards  the  Christian  population  of  his  Empire." 
This  treaty  was  signed  by  the  representatives  of  Turkey, 
England,  France,  Austria,  Russia,  Prussia,  and  Piedmont. 
Thus  closed  a  war  which  cost  several  hundred  thousand 
lives.  There  was  an  uneasy  feeling  in  governing  circles 
after  the  war  that  little  had  been  accomplished  by  this  large 
and  horrible  expenditure,  and  that  that  little  was  not  likely 
to  endure.  Future  events  justified  this  premonition.  Just 
fourteen  years  later,  during  the  Franco-German  war,  when 
Europe  was  powerless  to  prevent,  Russia  announced  that 
she  would  no  longer  observe  the  provision  concerning  the 
neutrality  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  in  1878  she  recovered  the 
strip  of  Bessarabia  that  gave  her  access  to  the  lower  courses 
of  the  Danube.  The  promise  of  the  Sultan  that  the  lot  of 
his  Christian  subjects  should  be  improved  was  ignored. 
Their  condition  became  worse.  And  the  guaranty  of  the 
integrity  of  his  empire,  and  the  promise  of  the  powers  not 
to  interfere  in  his  domestic  administration  were  to  ring  hol- 
low twenty  years  later.  The  Sultan  gained  in  importance 
from  this  war ;  the  French  Emperor  gained  military  glory 
and  diplomatic  prestige;  the  King  of  Piedmont  was  shortly 
to  be  amply  repaid  for  his  efforts  by  the  aid  of  Napoleon  III 
in  his  Italian  policy.  The  Crimean  war  had  this  further 
result  that,  showing  the  inefficiency  of  the  Russian  govern- 
ment, it  was  a  main  cause  of  the  wave  of  reform  which  swept 
over  that  country  in  the  early  years  of  the  reign  of  Alex- 
ander II.  As  a  solution  of  the  Eastern  Question  the  war 
was   a  flat  failure. 


MOLDAVIA  AND  WALLACHIA  617 

FROM  THE  TREATY  OF  PARIS  TO  THE  TREATY  OF 
BERLIN 

The  Eastern  Question  is  primarily  that  of  the  fate  of 
European  Turkey.  Shall  that  country  be  preserved  intact 
or  shall  it  be  dismembered ;  if  the  latter,  what  shall  be  the 
status  of  the  part  or  parts  taken  from  the  Sultan?  By  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  solution  of  the  question 
had  not  progressed  far.  The  only  part  that  had  become 
independent  was  Greece,  the  founding  of  which  kingdom  has 
been  traced.  The  Greeks,  however,  were  not  satisfied  with 
their  boundaries  and  cherished  the  fervent  ambition  that  they 
might  annex  other  parts  of  Turkey  in  which  members  of 
their  race  were  living,  and  even  entertained  the  hope  of 
Constantinople,  the  possession  of  which  priceless  position 
forms  the  very  crux  of  the  whole  Eastern  Question.  Two 
other  sections  of  European  Turkey  had  almost  attained 
statehood,  though  they  were  still  nominally  provinces  of 
Turkey :  Servia  and  Moldavia- Wallachia.  Both  aspired  to  Moldavia- 
convert  a  semi-independence  into  complete  independence.  In  ^  ^^  ^^' 
Moldavia-Wallachia  a  national  spirit  had  been  slowly  grow- 
ing up.  The  inhabitants,  feeling  that  they  were  of  the  same 
stock,  and  ought  to  be  thoroughly  united,  were  growing 
accustomed  to  apply  to  themselves  the  single  term,  Rou- 
manians. They  were  proud  of  their  ancient  origin,  of  their 
language,  largely  of  Latin  origin,  and  of  their  history. 
They  felt  that  they  were  destined  to  be  masters  in  their 
own  house,  not  pawns  to  be  used  by  Turkey  or  Russia. 
The  impulse  toward  nationality,  so  striking  and  fruitful  a 
characteristic  of  the  century,  moved  them,  as  it  was  moving 
Italians  and  Germans.  The  Crimean  war  facilitated  the  The 
realization  of  their  ambitions.  Though  the  Roumanians  I^oumanians 
took  no  part  in  the  war,  they  profited  by  it.  By  the  Treaty  Crimean 
of  Paris  all  Russian  rights  of  protection  over  the  provinces  War. 
were  abolished,  and  though  the  Sultan  still  remained  their 
sovereign  he  promised  to  grant  an  "  independent  and  national 


618    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

administration."  England  and  France  wished  to  go  a  step 
further,  and  to  recognize  the  two  provinces  as  an  entirely 
independent  state  of  Roumania.  There  would  be  a  mani- 
fest advantage  in  that  such  a  state  would  constitute  a 
buffer  between  Russia  and  Turkey,  standing  right  athwart 
the  way  to  Constantinople,  which  they  believed  Russia 
coveted.  But  Austria  and  Turkey  blocked  this  suggestion 
for  the  time  being.  The  powers  decided,  in  1858,  in  a  confer- 
ence held  in  Paris  that,  despite  the  wishes  of  the  people  for 
union,  they  should  remain  separate.  There  should  be  two 
princes  or  hospodars  elected  by  representatives  of  the  people, 
but  invested  with  their  powers  by  the  Sultan.  There  should 
also  be  an  assembly  in  each,  but  a  kind  of  central  committee 
should  prepare  legislation  common  to  the  "  United  Principali- 
ties of  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,"  as  they  were  officially 
called.  This,  of  course,  did  not  satisfy  the  inhabitants  of 
the  two  Principalities,  who  felt  that  they  were  one  in  race 
and  language  and  tradition,  and  ought  to  be  one  in  fact. 
The  Moldavians  and  Wallachians  now  proceeded  to  solve 
the  matters  to  their  taste,  encouraged  in  this  by  Napoleon 
III,  true  to  his  favorite  theory  of  nationalities.  Each 
elected,  early  in  1859,  the  same  man.  Colonel  Alexander 
The  union  of  Couza,  as  its  prince.  This  double  election  accomplished 
the  Pnnci-  ^j^^  desired  result.  Thus  the  Principalities  were  united  de 
facto.  Austria  was  in  no  position  to  forbid  this  consumma- 
tion as  she  was  then  involved  in  war  in  Italy.  Later  the 
two  assemblies  were  merged  into  one,  and  in  1862  the  Sultan 
recognized  these  changes.  Thus  the  Moldavians  and  Walla- 
chians had  achieved  their  union,  had  assumed  the  name 
Roumania,  and  had  chosen  Bucharest  as  their  capital.  But 
it  remained  for  them  to  attain  complete  independence.  They 
Couza.  still  paid  tribute   to   the   Sultan,   from   whom   their  prince 

received  his  investiture.  The  new  ruler,  "  Prince  of  Rou- 
mania," a  native  of  Moldavia,  styled  himself  Alexander 
John  I,  but  he  was  always  known  by  his  family  name  of 
Couza.     He  ruled  seven  years.     Thej^  were  years  of  great 


CHARLES  I  OF  ROUMANIA  619 

turbulence.  The  Prince  was  in  constant  conflict  with  the 
assembly,  and  ruled  most  of  the  time  in  defiance  of  the  con- 
stitution. He  alienated  the  influential  classes  of  the  clergy 
and  nobility  or  great  landowners,  the  former  by  confiscating 
the  property  of  the  monasteries,  an  act  later  vetoed  by  the 
powers  unless  the  clergy  should  be  indemnified,  and  the  latter 
by  freeing  the  peasants  from  their  feudal  dues,  and  trans- 
ferring most  of  the  land  to  them  on  the  condition  that  they 
pay  for  it  in  fifteen  annual  instalments.  This  was  a  bene- 
ficial social  reform,  somewhat  resembling  the  liberation  of 
the  serfs  in  Russia.  It  created  a  class  of  about  400,000 
small  proprietors.  But,  of  course,  it  made  the  nobles  his 
enemies.  The  masses,  on  the  other  hand,  thus  benefited,  were 
offended  by  the  tobacco  monopoly  which  Couza  introduced. 
A  conspiracy  was  formed  which,  in  1866,  succeeded  in  forc- 
ing him  to  abdicate.  Convinced  by  this  experience  that  it 
was  unwise  to  raise  one  of  their  own  citizens  to  the  position 
of  ruler,  the  Roumanians  decided  to  call  in  a  foreign  prince. 
They  chose  a  member  of  the  Roman  Catholic  branch  of  the  Charles  I  of 
Hohenzollern  family  who  became  Charles  I  of  Roumania.  ^^o^^^iania. 
This  German  prince,  who  is  still  their  ruler,  was  then  twenty- 
seven  years  of  age.  He  at  once  set  to  work  to  study  the 
conditions  of  his  newly  adopted  country,  ably  seconded  in 
this  by  his  wife,  a  German  princess,  whose  literary  gift  was 
to  win  her  a  great  reputation,  and  was  to  be  used  in  the 
interest  of  Roumania.  As  "  Carmen  Sylva  "  she  has  writ- 
ten poems  and  stories,  has  published  a  collection  of  Rou- 
manian folklore,  and  has  encouraged  the  national  idea  by 
showing  her  preference  for  the  native  Roumanian  dress  and 
for  old  Roumanian  customs. 

Charles  I  was  primarily  a  soldier,  and  the  great  work  of 
the  early  years  of  his  reign  was  to  build  up  the  army,  as 
he  believed  it  essential  if  Roumania  was  to  be  really  inde- 
pendent in  her  attitude  toward  Russia  and  Turkey.  He  In- 
creased the  size  of  the  army,  equipped  it  with  Prussian  guns, 
and  had  it  drilled  by  Prussian  officers.     The  wisdom  of  this 


620    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


\ 


Reopening 

of   the 

Eastern 

Question. 


The  insur- 
rection of 
Herzego- 
vina. 


was  apparent  when  the  Eastern  Question  was  reopened  in 
1875.  The  fact  that  she  possessed  an  army  of  the  modem 
type  enabled  Roumania  to  play  an  important  part  in  the 
affairs  of  the  Balkan  peninsula. 

In  1875  the  Eastern  Question  entered  once  more  upon  an 
acute  phase.  Movements  began  which  were  to  have  a  pro- 
found effect  upon  the  various  sections  of  the  peninsula.  An 
insurrection  broke  out  in  the  summer  of  1875  in  Herzegovina, 
a  province  west  of  Servia.  For  years  the  peasantry  had 
suffered  under  the  gross  misrule  of  the  Turks.  Turkey, 
almost  bankrupt,  resorted  to  heavier  taxation,  especially  of 
her  Christian  subjects.  The  oppression  became  so  grinding 
and  was  accompanied  by  acts  so  barbarous  and  inhuman 
that  the  peasants  finally  rebelled.  These  peasants  were 
Slavs,  and  as  such  were  aided  by  Slavs  from  neighboring 
regions,  Bosnia,  Servia,  and  Bulgaria.  They  were  made  all 
the  more  bitter  because  they  saw  Slavs  in  Servia  compara- 
tively contented,  as  they  were  largely  self-governed.  Why 
should  not  they  themselves  enjoy  as  good  conditions  as 
others  .P  Religious  and  racial  hatred  of  Christian  and  Slav 
against  the  infidel  Turk  flamed  up  throughout  the  penin- 
sula. The  Balkan  peoples  also  were  stirred,  as  were  so 
many  others,  by  the  sight  of  Italy  achieving  her  independ- 
ence on  the  basis  of  nationality.  The  Turks  did  not  suc- 
ceed in  stamping  out  this  dangerous  movement  at  its  com- 
mencement, encouraged  as  it  was  by  the  Slavs  of  Servia, 
Montenegro,  and  even  Austria.  Attempts  were  made  by 
diplomacy  to  induce  the  Porte  to  make  concessions  sufficient 
to  pacify  the  discontented  Christians.  The  attempts  failed, 
as  the  Christians  placed  no  faith  in  Turkish  promises  and 
as  the  powers  were  not  united  in  their  demands,  England 
rejecting  the  arrangement  that  seemed  most  likely  to  ensure 
peace  by  guaranteeing  on  the  part  of  the  powers  the  effec- 
tive execution  of  the  Sultan's  promise  of  reforai.  (Berlin 
Memorandum,  1876.) 

Meanwhile  events  occurred  in  Constantinople  which  greatly 


THE  BULGARIAN  ATROCITIES  621 

complicated  the  situation.  In  March  1876,  the  Sultan,  Abdul- 
Aziz,  was  deposed  by  a  palace  revolution,  and  his  nephew  put 
upon  the  throne  as  Murad  V.  The  new  Sultan  was  shortly 
found  to  be,  or  at  least  was  declared  to  be,  imbecile,  and  was 
deposed    after    a    reign    of    three    months.     Thereupon    his  Accession  of 

brother,  Abdul  Hamid  II,  ascended  the  throne,  a  very  res-  Abdul 

rm  •  1     1  •     Hamid  II. 

olute,  subtle,  and  resourceful  man.     These  rapid  changes  m 

Constantinople  were  due  to  a  recrudescence  of  national  and 
religious  fanaticism  in  "  Turkey,  to  a  f eehng  that  Turkey 
should  be  for  the  Turks,  that  she  should  no  longer  be  the 
sport  of  foreign  powers,  that  she  should  control  her  own 
destinies  without  intervention.  But  the  intervention  of  the 
Christian  powers  was  becoming  more  and  more  inevitable 
because  of  this  very  revival  of  racial  and  religious  fanati- 
cism. They  could  not  rest  easy  witnessing  the  outrages 
committed  upon  their  co-religionists.  And  just  at  this  time 
those  outrages  attained  a  ferocity  that  shocked  all  Europe. 

Early  in  1876  the  Christians  in  Bulgaria,  a  large  province  The 
of  European  Turkey,  rose  against  the  Turkish  officials,  ^^^^^JJ^gg^ 
killing  some  of  them.  The  revenge  taken  by  the  Turks  was 
of  incredible  atrocity.  Pouring  regular  troops  and  the 
ferocious  irregulars  called  Bashi-Bazouks  into  the  province, 
they  butchered  thousands  with  every  refinement  or  coarse- 
ness of  brutality.  In  the  valley  of  the  Maritza  all  but 
fifteen  of  eighty  villages  were  practically  destroyed.  An 
official  report  to  the  English  government  of  what  occurred 
at  Batak,  a  town  of  about  7,000  inhabitants,  indicates 
graphically  the  style  adopted  and  pursued.  A  Turk  named 
Achmet  Agha  was  ordered  to  attack  it.  "  The  inhabitants 
had  a  parley  with  Achmet  who  solemnly  swore  that  if  they 
gave  up  their  arms  not  a  hair  of  their  heads  should  be 
touched.  The  villagers  believed  Achmet's  oath  and  sur- 
rendered their  arms,  but  this  demand  was  followed  by  an- 
other for  all  the  money  in  the  village,  which,  of  course,  had 
also  to  be  acceded  to.  No  sooner  was  the  money  given  up 
than  the  Bashi-Bazouks  set  upon  the  people  and  slaughtered 


622     DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

them  like  sheep.  A  large  number  of  people,  probably  about 
one  thousand  or  twelve  hundred,  took  refuge  in  the  church 
and  churchyard,  the  latter  being  surrounded  by  a  wall. 
The  church  itself  is  a  solid  building  and  resisted  all  the 
attempts  of  the  Bashi-Bazouks  to  burn  it  from  the  outside. 
They  consequently  fired  in  through  the  windows,  and  getting 
upon  the  roof  tore  off  the  tiles,  and  threw  burning  pieces 
of  wood  and  rags  dipped  in  petroleum  among  the  mass  of 
unhappy  human  beings  inside.  At  last  the  door  was  forced 
In,  the  massacre  completed,  and  the  inside  of  the  church 
burned.  The  spectacle  which  the  church  and  churchyard 
present  must  be  seen  to  be  described ;  hardly  a  corpse  has 
been  buried.  ...  I  visited  this  valley  of  the  shadow 
of  death  on  the  31st  of  July,  more  than  two  months  and 
a  half  after  the  massacre,  but  still  the  stench  was  so  over- 
powering that  one  could  hardly  force  one's  way  into  the 
church.  In  the  streets  at  every  step  lay  remains  rotting 
and  sweltering  in  the  summer  sun.  Just  outside  the  village 
I  counted  more  than  sixty  skulls  in  a  little  hollow.  From 
the  remains  of  female  wearing  apparel  scattered  about  it  is 
plain  that  many  of  the  persons  here  massacred  were 
women."  ^  This  official  estimated  that  in  Batak  alone  the 
number  of  killed  was  about  5,000. 
Gladstone's         The  Bulgarian  atrocities  thrilled  all  Europe  with  horror. 

'   ,     Mr.  Gladstone,  emerging  from  retirement,  denounced  "  the 
ation  of  the  '  &     &  ^ 

Turks.  unspeakable   Turk  "    in    a   flaming   pamphlet   called   "  Bul- 

garian Horrors  and  the  Question  of  the  East."  He  de- 
manded that  England  cease  to  support  a  government  that 
was  an  aflPront  to  the  laws  of  God,  and  urged  that  the  Turks 
be  expelled  from  Europe  "  bag  and  baggage."  The  Dis- 
raeli ministry  dared  not  lend  its  support  in  behalf  of  Turkey, 
as  it  would  have  liked  to  do,  so  vehement  was  public 
opinion.  It  did  not,  however,  intervene  in  behalf  of  the 
oppressed  Christians. 

Servia    and    Montenegro,    in    July    1876,    declared    war 
^  Baring's  report. 


THE  RUSSO-TURKISH  WAR  623 

against    Turkc}'^,    and    the   insurrection    of    the    Bulgarians  Servia   and 

became  general.     The  Russian  people  became  intensely  ex-  ,  °f  enegro 
..  .  .  ...  .    declare  war. 

cited  in  their  sympathy  with  their  co-religionists  and  their 

fellow-Slavs.  Thousands  of  Russian  volunteers  enrolled 
under  the  Servian  flag.  But  the  Turks  were  able  to  over- 
come their  enemies  by  force  of  superior  numbers.  Alex- 
ander II  did  not  wish  war,  but  on  November  2,  1876,  he  said 
to  the  British  ambassador  that  the  present  state  of  affairs 
in  Turkey  "  was  intolerable,  and  unless  Europe  was  prepared 
to  act  with  firmness  and  energy,  he  should  be  obliged  to 
act  alone."  He  would  act,  not  for  self-interest,  but  solely 
in  the  name  of  humanity.  He  had  not  "  the  smallest  wish 
or  intention  to  be  possessed  of  Constantinople."  Renewed 
attempts  were  made  to  settle  the  whole  trouble  by  diplomacy. 
These  attempts  proved  unsuccessful  owing  to  the  opposition 
of  the  Sultan,  who  was  dominated  by  reactionary  forces,  and 
who  felt  certain  that  support  would  come  from  the  west,  par- 
ticularly from  England.     He  remembered  the  Crimean  war. 

Russia,  tired  of  long  drawn  out  and  insincere  negotia-  Russia 
tions,  declared  war  upon  Turkey,  April  24,  1877.  She  had  declares 
as  allies  Roumania,  which  took  occasion  to  proclaim  its 
entire  independence  of  Turkey  (May  21,  1877),  Servia,  and 
Montenegro.  The  war  lasted  until  the  close  of  January 
1878.  Crossing  the  Danube  and  pushing  southward,  the 
Russians  gained  some  successes,  and  seized  one  of  the  passes 
through  the  Balkans.  But  the  key  to  the  campaign  was  the 
control  of  Plevna.  This  place,  situated  between  the  Danube 
and  the  Balkans,  was  the  center  of  an  extensive  system  of 
roads  through  Bulgaria.  The  Russians  could  not  safely 
pass  south  of  the  Balkans  without  controlling  this  strategic 
position.  They  had  made  the  mistake  of  allowing  the  Turk- 
ish commander,  Osman  Pasha,  to  occupy  and  to  fortify  it. 
The  Russians  made  three  vigorous  attempts  to  carry  it 
by  storm,  but  were  repulsed  with  heavy  losses  (July-Sep- 
tember 1877).  It  was  evident  that  Plevna  could  not  be  ^^^  ^^®^® 
taken    by    assault    but    only    by    regular    siege.     Todleben, 


Treaty 
of  San 
Stefano. 


Opposition 
to  the 
treaty. 


624    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

who  had  distinguished  himself  greatly  as  the  defender  of 
Sebastopol  in  the  Crimean  war,  was  now  placed  in  supreme 
command.  By  October  24th  the  investment  was  completed' 
by  an  army  numbering  fully  120,000  men.  The  siege  was 
slow  but  was  finally  successful.  On  December  10th,  Osman 
surrendered  an  army  of  43,000  soldiers  and  seventy-seven 
guns.  His  defense  had  been  very  brilliant.  He  had  de- 
tained for  five  months  an  army  three  times  as  large  as  his  own. 

The  backbone  of  Turkish  resistance  was  thus  broken. 
Though  it  was  mid-winter  the  Russians  now  poured  through 
the  passes  of  the  Balkans,  and  marched  rapidly  toward 
Constantinople.  On  January  20,  1878,  they  entered  Adrian- 
ople.  The  Sultan  sought  peace,  and  on  March  3rd  the 
Treaty  of  San  Stefano  was  concluded  between  Russia  and 
Turkey.  By  this  treaty  the  Porte  recognized  the  complete 
independence  of  Servia,  Montenegro,  and  Roumania,  and 
made  certain  cessions  of  territory  to  the  two  foraier  states. 
The  main  feature  of  the  treaty  concerned  Bulgaria,  which 
was  made  a  self-governing  state,  tributary  to  the  Sultan. 
Its  frontiers  were  very  liberally  drawn.  Its  territory  was 
to  include  nearly  all  of  European  Turkey,  between  Roumania 
and  Servia  to  the  north,  and  Greece  to  the  south.  Only  a 
broken  strip  across  the  peninsula,  from  Constantinople  west 
to  the  Adriatic,  was  to  be  left  to  Turkey.  The  new  state 
therefore  was  to  include  not  only  Bulgaria  proper,  but 
Roumelia  to  the  south  and  most  of  Macedonia.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's desire  for  the  expulsion  of  the  Turks  from  Europe 
"  bag  and  baggage  "  was  nearly  realized. 

But  this  treaty  was  not  destined  to  be  carried  out.  It 
satisfied  no  one  except  the  Russians  and  the  Bulgarians. 
There  was  much  opposition  to  it  in  the  Balkan  peninsula 
itself.  The  Greeks  opposed  it  because  it  cut  short  the  ex- 
pansion they  desired  northward,  particularly  into  Mace- 
donia. The  Sei'^'ians  were  opposed  for  a  similar  reason, 
as  they  wished  a  part  of  this  territory  now  adjudged  to 
Bulgaria.     Many  Servians  lived  in  Macedonia.     The  Ron- 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  BERLIN  625 

manians  protested  vehemently  when  they  learned  that,  m 
reward  for  then*  services  to  Russia  at  Plevna,  they  were  to 
cede  to  Russia  a  part  of  their  territory,  Bessarabia,  receiv- 
ing an  inferior  compensation  in  the  Dobrudscha,  a  region 
about  the  mouths  of  the  Danube.  But  more  important  was 
the  opposition  of  the  powers  of  western  Europe.  They  did 
not  wish  to  have  the  Eastern  Question  solved  without  their 
consent.     England  particularly,  fearing  Russian  expansion  England 

southward    toward    the    Mediterranean,    and    believing    that    ^°^^"  ^  ^  ^ 

°  revision. 

Bulgaria    and   the   other   states    would   be    merely    tools    of 

Russia,  declared  that  the  arrangements  concerning  the  penin- 
sula must  be  determined  by  the  great  European  powers,  that 
the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  must  be  submitted  to  a  general 
congress  on  the  ground  that,  according  to  the  international 
law  of  Europe,  the  Eastern  Question  could  not  be  settled  by 
one  nation  but  only  ])y  the  concert  of  powers,  as  it  affected 
them  all.  Austria  joined  the  protest,  wishing  a  part  of 
the  spoils  of  Turkey  for  herself.  Russia  naturally  objected 
to  allowing  those  who  had  not  fought  determine  the  outcome 
of  her  victory.  But  as  the  powers  were  insistent,  particu- 
larly England,  then  under  the  Beaconsfield  administration, 
and  as  she  was  in  no  position  for  further  hostilities,  she 
yielded.  The  Congress  of  Berlin  was  held  under  the  presi-  ^^® 
dency  of  Bismarck,  Beaconsfield  himself  representing  Eng-  3gj.jj_ 
land.  It  drew  up  the  Treaty  of  Berlin,  which  was  signed 
July  13,  1878.  B3'  this  treaty  Montenegro,  Servia,  and 
Roumania  were  rendered  completely  independent  of  Turkey. 
The  Greater  Bulgaria  of  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  was 
divided  into  three  main  parts,  Macedonia,  left  as  a  part 
of  Turkey  under  the  direct  authority  of  the  Sultan,  Eastern  - 
Roumelia,  as  a  part  of  Turkey,  but  to  be  autonomous  and 
to  have  a  Christian  governor  appointed  by  the  Sultan,  and 
Bulgaria,  to  be  still  nominally  a  part  of  Turkey,  but  to  be 
autonomous,  with  a  prince  to  be  elected  freely  by  the  Bul- 
garians, the  election,  however,  to  be  confirmed  by  the  Sultan 
with  the  assent  of  the  powers.     The  various  powers  were  not 


6^m    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

tliinking  of  Turkey  in  all  this,  nor  of  the  happiness  of 
the  people  who  had  long  been  oppressed  by  Turkey.  They 
found  the  occasion  convenient  for  taking  various  Turkish 
possessions  for  themselves.  Austria  was  invited  to  "  occupy  " 
and  administer  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  in  the  interest  of 
the  peace  of  Europe.  Russia  retained  a  part  of  Turkish 
Armenia,  which  she  had  conquered,  and  which  included 
Ardahan,  Kars,  and  Batoum.  The  Congress  also  forced 
Roumania  to  cede  Bessarabia  to  Russia  and  to  take  the 
Dobrudscha  as  compensation.  This  made  Roumania  the 
enemy  of  Russia  as  the  district  ceded  was  peopled  by  Rou- 
manians, not  by  Russians.  The  powers  recommended  that 
the  Sultan  cede  Thessaly  and  a  part  of  Epirus  to  Greece,  a 
recommendation  only  grudgingly  complied  with  three  years 
later.  Before  the  meeting  of  the  Congress,  England  had 
induced  Turkey  to  permit  her  to  occupy  the  island 
of  Cyprus,  and  in  return  for  this  she  undertook  to 
guarantee  the  integrity  of  the  Sultan's  remaining  dominions 
in  Asia. 
Independ-  As  a  result  of  this  war,  therefore,  three  Balkan  states, 

ence  of  long  in  the  process  of  formation,  Montenegro,  Servia,  and 

Servia  and'  I^oumania,  had  become  entirely  independent  of  their  former 
Roumania.  suzerain  Turkey,  and  a  new  state,  Bulgaria,  had  been  called 
into  existence,  though  still  slightly  subject  to  the  Porte,  and 
a  new  district.  Eastern  Roumelia,  was  assured  a  freer  life, 
though  denied  union  with  Bulgaria.  All  this  had  been  accom- 
plished as  a  result  of  the  intervention  of  Russia. 

The  Treaty   of   Berlin   was   not   a   final   solution   of   the 

Eastern  Question.     In  one  of  its  most  important  provisions 

it  did  not  endure  ten  years.     The  device  of  separating  the 

Bulgarians  north  of  the  Balkans  from  the  Bulgarians  south 

of  the  Balkans,  in  spite  of  the  entire  racial  and  spiritual 

unity  of  the  two,  and  the  wishes  of  the  two,  of  attempting 

Union  also  to  make  the  latter  forget  that  they  were  Bulgarians 

of  the  two    by  the  childisli  device  of  calling  their  province  Eastern  Rou- 

u  garias.      jjielia,    endured   precisely    seven    years.     In    1885    the   Bui- 


THE  TREATY  OF  BERLIN  627 

garians  took  matters  into  their  own  hands,  declared  them- 
selves united,  and  tore  up  this  arrangement  of  the  Congress 
of  Berlin,  and  the  powers  were  forced  to  look  on  in  acquies- 
cence. The  other  arrangement  of  leaving  Macedonia  in  the 
hands  of  Turkey  simply  raised  another  question,  the  Macedo- 
nian, which  has  since  that  day  been  a  source  of  constant 
uneasiness  to  Europe,  a  recurrent  cause  of  alarm,  frequently 
threatening  a  general  conflagration.  As  far  as  humanitarian 
considerations  are  concerned  this  disposition  of  Macedonia 
has  been  a  colossal  blunder.  The  Turks  have  not  carried 
out  the  promised  reforms,  and  the  conditions  of  the  people 
would  certainly  have  been  greatly  improved  had  Macedonia  Macedonia, 
been  a  part  of  Bulgaria  as  provided  by  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano.  This  determination  of  the  fate  of  Macedonia, 
which  was  the  essential  diff'erence  between  the  two  treaties, 
was  one  wholly  deplorable.  Owing  to  the  rival  ambitions  of 
the  western  powers  Macedonian  Christians  were  destined 
long  to  suff^er  an  odious  oppression  from  which  more  fortu- 
nate Balkan  Christians  were  free. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  benefits  assured  by  the  Treaty  of 
Berlin  were  great  and  unmistakable.  Before  the  Russo- 
Turkish  war  the  population  of  European  Turkey  was  about 
seventeen  or  eighteen  million.  As  a  result  of  the  Treaty  of 
Berlin,  European  Turkey  was  greatly  reduced,  and  its  popu- 
lation was  only  about  six  million.  In  other  words  eleven 
million  people  or  more  had  been  emancipated  from  Turkish 
control.  This  constituted  an  important  partition  of  Turkey. 
Yet  the  powers  had,  in  1856,  guaranteed  the  territorial 
integrity  and  the  independence  in  internal  affairs  of  the 
Ottoman  Empire,  a  guarantee  as  farcical  as  many  others 
made  in  the  course  of  the  history  of  this  Eastern  Question. 

BULGARIA  SINCE  1878 

The  Treaty  of  Berlin,  while  it  brought  substantial  ad- 
vantages, did  not  bring  peace  to  the  Balkan  peninsula.  The 
history  of  the  various  statps  since  1878,  both  in  internal 


ms    DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOINIAN  EMPIRE 


Alexander 
of  Batten- 
berg. 


affairs  and  in  their  foreign  relations,  has  been  agitated, 
3^et,  despite  disturbances,  considerable  progress  has  been 
made. 

Bulgaria,  of  which  Europe  knew  hardly  anything  in  1876, 
was,  in  1878,  made  an  autonomous  state,  but  it  did  not 
attain  complete  independence,  as  it  was  nominally  a  part  of 
the  Turkish  Empire,  to  which  it  was  to  pay  tribute.  The 
new  principality  owed  its  existence  to  Russia,  and  for  several 
years  Russian  influence  predominated  in  it.  It  was  started 
on  its  career  by  Russian  officials.  A  constitution  was  drawn 
up  establishing  an  assembly  called  the  Sobranje.  This 
assembly  chose  as  Prince  of  Bulgaria,  Alexander  of  Batten- 
berg,  a  young  Gorman  of  twent3'-two,  a  relative  of  the 
Russian  Imperial  House,  supposedly  acceptable  to  the  Tsar 
(April  1879). 

The  Bulgarians  were  grateful  to  the  Russians  for  their 
aid.  They  recognized  those  who  remained  after  the  war 
was  over  as  having  all  the  rights  of  Bulgarian  citizens, 
among  others  the  right  to  hold  office.  Russians  held  im- 
portant positions  in  the  Bulgarian  ministry.  Russians 
tetween  the  organized  the  military  forces  and  became  officers.  Before 
f'  long,  however,  friction  developed,  and  gratitude  gave  way 

Russians.  ^^  indignation  at  the  high-handed  conduct  of  the  Russians, 
who  plainly  regarded  Bulgaria  as  a  sort  of  province  or  out- 
post of  Russia,  to  be  administered  according  to  Russian 
ideas  and  interests.  The  Russian  ministers  were  arrogant, 
and  made  it  evident  that  they  regai'ded  the  Tsar,  not  Prince 
Alexander,  as  their  superior,  whose  wishes  they  were  bound 
to  execute.  The  Prince,  the  native  arm}^  officers,  and  the 
people  found  their  position  increasingly^  humiliating.  Fi- 
nally, in  1883,  the  Russian  ministers  were  virtually  forced 
to  resign,  and  the  Prince  now  relied  upon  Bulgarian  leaders. 
This  caused  an  open  breach  with  Russia  which  was  further 
widened  by  the  discovery  of  an  unsuccessful  Russian  plot 
to  kidnap  Alexander. 

Meanwhile,  the  resentment  of  the  Bulgarians  of  Eastern 


Friction 


UNION  OF  THE  TWO  BULGARIAS  629 

Iloumella  at  their  separation  from  Bulgaria  bj  the  Treaty 
of  Berlin  steadily  increased,  and  in  1885  a  bloodless  revolu- 
tion was  carried  through  which  destroyed  this  artificial  Breach 
arrangement.  The  people  of  that  province  expelled  the  rep-  °^  ^^^ 
resentative  of  Turkish  authority,  and  expressed  their  en-  ^  ^  i- 
thusiastic  desire  for  union  with  Bulgaria.  Prince  Alex- 
ander was  forced  to  choose  between  the  Russians,  whom  he 
knew  to  be  opposed  to  this  aggrandizement  of  Bulgaria,  and 
his  own  people  and  those  of  Eastern  Roumelia,  who  were 
eager  for  the  union.  He  chose  the  latter  and  became  the 
"  Prince  of  the  Two  Bulgarias."  It  was  expected  that  in- 
ternational complications  would  result,  that  Europe  would 
insist  upon  the  observance  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin.  But 
the  moment  for  collective  intervention  was  not  propitious, 
owing  mainly  to  the  extraordinarily  tangled  internal  political 
conditions  in  various  countries.  The  wrath  of  Russia  was 
great,  and  was  shown  in  her  recall  of  all  Russian  officers 
from  the  Bulgarian  army,  leaving  the  army  demoralized  „  . 
in  its  leadership.  Just  at  this  moment,  Servia,  claiming  attacks 
that  the  union  of  Eastern  Roumelia  and  Bulgaria  would  Bulgaria, 
overthrow  the  equilibrium  of  the  Balkan  states,  jealous  of 
the  aggrandizement  of  her  neighbor,  and  believing  that  her 
army  was  disorganized,  and  that  the  European  nations  would 
chastise  her  for  her  action  in  regard  to  Eastern  Roumelia, 
suddenly  attacked  her.  Bulgaria  took  up  the  gauntlet,  en- 
thusiasm fired  her  army,  and,  crippled  as  she  was,  to  the 
astonishment  of  Europe  she  expelled  the  Servians,  severely 
defeated  them,  and  invaded  their  own  country  only  to  be 
stopped  by  Austria,  which  insisted  upon  a  treaty  between 
the  combatants  on  the  basis  of  the  situation  before  the  war 
(Treaty  of  Bucharest,  March  3,  1886).  Bulgaria  gained 
no  territory  by  this  war,  but  she  gained  prestige.  She 
stood  before  Europe  in  a  new  light,  and  the  war  really 
founded  her  unity.  In  the  face  of  the  unanimous  desire 
of  the  people,  it  was  seen  to  be  futile  to  insist  on  the 
separateness  of  Roumelia,  now  swallowed  up  in  Bulgaria. 


630     DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


Abdication 
of  Prince 
Alexander. 


Ferdinand 
of  Saxe- 
Coburg. 


Dictator- 
ship of 
StambuloflF. 


Tlie  powers  protested  against  this  unification,  and  would 
not  recognize  the  change,  but  they  refrained  from  doing  any- 
thing further. 

Russia,  however,  incensed  at  the  growing  independence 
of  the  new  state,  which  she  looked  upon  as  a  mere  satel- 
lite, resolved  to  read  her  a  lesson  in  humility  by  organizing 
a  conspiracy.  The  conspirators  seized  Prince  Alexander 
in  his  bedroom  in  the  dead  of  night,  forced  him  to  sign 
his  abdication,  and  then  carried  him  off  to  Russian  soil. 
Alexander  was  detained  in  Russia  a  short  time,  until  it 
was  supposed  that  the  Russian  party  was  thoroughly  estab- 
lished in  power  in  Bulgaria,  when  he  was  permitted  to  go 
to  Austria.  He  was  immediately  recalled  to  Bulgaria,  re- 
turned to  receive  an  immense  ovation,  and  then,  at  the 
height  of  his  popularity,  in  a  moment  of  weakness,  abdicated, 
apparently  overwhelmed  by  the  continued  opposition  of 
Russia  (September  7,  1886).  The  situation  was  most  crit- 
ical. Two  parties  advocating  opposite  policies  confronted 
each  other;  one  pro-Russian,  believing  that  Bulgaria  should 
accept  in  place  of  Alexander  any  prince  whom  the  Tsar 
should  choose  for  her ;  the  other  national  and  independent, 
rallying  to  the  cry  of  "  Bulgaria  for  the  Bulgarians."  The 
latter  speedily  secured  control,  fortunate  in  that  it  had  a 
remarkable  leader  in  the  person  of  Stambuloff,  a  native,  a 
son  of  an  innkeeper,  a  man  of  extraordinary  firmness,  supple- 
ness, and  courage,  vigorous  and  intelligent.  Through  him 
Russian  efforts  to  regain  control  of  the  principality  were 
foiled  and  a  new  ruler  was  secured.  Prince  Ferdinand  of 
Saxe-Coburg,  twenty-six  years  of  age,  who  was  elected  unan- 
imously by  the  Sobranje,  July  7,  1887.  Russia  protested 
against  this  action,  and  none  of  the  great  powers  recognized 
Ferdinand. 

Stambuloff  was  the  most  forceful  statesman  developed  in 
the  history  of  the  Balkan  states.  He  succeeded  in  keeping 
Bulgai'ia  self-dependent.  During  the  earlier  years  of  his 
rule  Ferdinand  relied  upon  him,  and,  indeed,  owed  to  him  his 


DICTATORSHIP  OF  STAMBULOFF  631 

continuance  on  the  throne.  He  won  the  pretentious  title 
of  "  the  Bulgarian  Bismarck."  His  methods  resembled  those 
of  his  Teutonic  prototype  in  more  than  one  respect.  For 
seven  years  he  was  practically  dictator  of  Bulgaria.  Rus- 
sian plots  continued.  He  repressed  them  pitilessly.  His 
one  fundamental  principle  was  Bulgaria  for  the  Bulgarians. 
His  rule  was  one  of  terror,  of  suppression  of  liberties,  of 
unscrupulousness,  directed  to  patriotic  ends.  His  object 
was  to  rid  Bulgaria  of  Russian,  as  of  Turkish  control. 
Bulgaria  under  him  increased  in  wealth  and  population. 
The  army  received  a  modem  equipment,  universal  military 
service  was  instituted,  commerce  was  encouraged,  railroads 
were  built,  popular  education  begun,  and  the  capital,  Sofia, 
a  dirty,  wretched  Turkish  village,  made  over  into  one  of 
the  attractive  capitals  of  Europe.  But  Stambuloff  made 
a  multitude  of  enemies,  and  as  a  result  he  fell  from  power 
in  1894.  In  the  following  year  he  was  foully  murdered  Murder  of 
in  the  streets  of  Sofia.  But  he  had  done  his  work  thoroughly,  Stambuloff. 
and  it  remains  the  basis  of  the  life  of  Bulgaria  to-day. 
The  Turkish  sovereignty  was  merely  nominal,  and  even  that 
was  not  destined  to  endure  long.  In  March  1896  the  election 
of  Ferdinand  as  prince  was  finally  recognized  by  the  great 
powers.  The  preceding  years  had  been  immensely  significant. 
They  had  thoroughly  consolidated  the  unity  of  Bulgaria, 
had  permitted  her  institutions  to  strike  root,  had  accustomed 
her  to  independence  of  action,  to  self-reliance.  Those  years, 
too,  had  been  used  for  the  enrichment  of  the  national  life 
with  the  agencies  of  the  modern  world,  schools,  railways,  an 
army.  Bulgaria  had  a  population  of  about  four  million,  a 
capital  in  Sofia,  an  area  of  about  38,000  square  miles.  She 
aspired  to  annex  Macedonia,  where,  however,  she  was  to  en- 
counter many  rivals.  She  only  awaited  a  favorable  oppor- 
tunity to  renounce  her  nominal  connection  with  Turkey. 
The  opportunity  came  in  1908.  On  October  5th  of  that 
year  Bulgaria  declared  her  independence,  and  her  Prince 
assumed  the  title  of  King. 


632       DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


ROUMANIA  AND  SERVIA  SINCE  1878 


Roumania 
proclaimed 
a    kingdom 


Agrarian 
disturb- 
ances. 


At  the  outbreak  of  tlie  Russo-Turkish  war  in  1877,  Rou- 
mania declared  herself  entirely  independent  of  Turkey.  This 
independence  was  recognized  by  the  Sultan  and  the  powers 
at  the  Congress  of  Berlin  on  condition  that  all  citizens 
should  enjoy  legal  equality,  whatever  their  religion,  a  condi- 
tion designed  to  protect  the  Jews,  who  were  numerous,  but 
who  had  previously  been  without  political  rights. 

In  1881  Roumania  proclaimed  herself  a  kingdom,  and 
her  prince  henceforth  styled  himself  King  Charles  I.  The 
royal  crown  was  made  of  steel  from  a  Turkish  gun  cap- 
tured at  Plevna,  a  perpetual  reminder  of  what  was  her 
war  of  independence.  Roumania  has  created  an  army  on 
Prussian  models  of  about  175,000  men,  has  built  railroads 
and  highways,  and  has,  by  agrarian  legislation,  improved  the 
condition  of  the  peasantry.  The  population  has  steadily 
increased,  and  now  numbers  nearly  seven  million.  The  area 
of  Roumania  is  about  50,000  square  miles.  While  mainly 
an  agricultural  country,  in  recent  years  her  industrial  de- 
velopment has  been  notable,  and  her  commerce  is  more  im- 
portant than  that  of  any  other  Balkan  state.  Her  govern- 
ment is  a  constitutional  monarchy,  with  legislative  chambers. 
The  most  important  political  question  in  recent  years  has  been 
a  demand  for  the  reform  of  the  electoral  system,  which 
resembles  the  Prussian  three-class  system,  and  which  gives 
the  direct  vote  to  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  population. 
In  1907  the  peasantry  rose  in  insurrection,  demanding 
agrarian  reforms.  As  more  than  four-fifths  of  the  popula- 
tion live  upon  the  land,  and  as  the  population  has  steadily 
increased,  the  holding  of  each  peasant  has  correspondingly 
decreased.  A  military  force  of  140,000  men  was  needed 
to  quell  the  revolt.  After  having  restored  order,  the 
ministry  introduced  and  carried  various  measures  in- 
tended to  bring  relief  to  the  peasants  from  their  severest 
burdens. 


CONDITIONS  IN  SERVIA  633 

Servia,  also,  was  recognized  as  independent  by  the  Berlin  Servia. 
Treaty  in  1878.  She  proclaimed  herself  a  kingdom  in  1882. 
She  has  had  a  turbulent  history  in  recent  years.  In  1885 
she  declared  war  against  Bulgaria,  as  has  been  stated,  only 
to  be  unexpectedly  and  badly  defeated.  The  financial  policy 
was  deplorable.  In  seven  years  the  debt  increased  from 
seven  million  to  three  hundred  and  twelve  million  francs. 
The  scandals  of  the  private  life  of  King  Milan  utterly  dis- 
credited the  monarchy.  He  was  forced  to  abdicate  in  1889, 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  twelve-year-old  son,  Alexander  I, 
who  was  brutally  murdered  in  1903  with  his  wife.  Queen 
Draga,  in  a  midnight  palace  revolution,  and  the  present 
occupant  of  the  throne,  Peter  I,  has  been  in  most  unstable 
power  since  tlien.  The  present  King  is  of  the  house  of 
Karageorge,  which  has  ended  its  century-long  feud  with 
the  house  of  Obrcnovitch  by  exterminating  the  latter  in  the 
murders  of  1903,  While  some  progress  has  been  made 
along  economic  and -educational  lines,  the  condition  of  the 
country  is  far  from  satisfactory.  The  present  regime  is 
odious  by  reason  of  the  manner  of  its  origin.  Its  duration 
is  problematical. 

GREECE  SINCE  1833 

In  January  1833,  Otto,  second  son  of  Louis  I,  the  King 
of  Bavaria,  became  King  of  Greece,  a  country  of  great 
poverty,  with  a  population  of  about  750,000,  unaccustomed 
to  the  reign  of  law  and  order  usual  in  western  Europe.  The 
kingdom  was  small,  with  unsatisfactory  boundaries,  lacking 
Thessaly,  which  was  peopled  entirely  by  Greeks.  The  coun- 
try had  been  devastated  by  a  long  and  unusually  sanguinary 
war.  Internal  conditions  were  anarchic.  Brigandage  was 
rife;  the  debt  was  large.  The  problem  was,  how  to  make 
out  of  such  unpromising  materials  a  prosperous  and  pro- 
gressive state. 

King  Otto  reigned  from  1833  to  1862,       He  was   aided  Reign  of 
in  his  government  by  many  Bavarians,  who  filled  important  ®"°  ^' 


634      DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

positions  in  the  army  and  the  civil  service.  This  German 
influence  was  a  primary  cause  of  the  unpopuhirity  of  the 
new  regime.  Tlic  beginnings  were  made,  however,  in  the 
construction  of  a  liealthy  national  life.  Athens  was  made 
the  capital,  and  a  university  was  established  there.  A 
police  system  was  organized;  a  national  bank  created.  In 
184-1  Otto  was  forced  to  consent  to  the  conversion  of  his 
absolute  monarchy  into  a  constitutional  one.  A  parlia- 
ment with  two  chambers,  the  Deputies  being  chosen  by  uni- 
versal suffrage,  was  instituted.  The  political  education  of 
the  Greeks  then  began. 

From  the  reopening  of  the  Eastern  Question  by  the 
Crimean  war  Greece  hoped  to  profit  by  the  enlargement 
of  her  boundaries.  The  great  powers,  however,  thought 
otherwise,  and  forced  her  to  remain  quiet.  Because  the 
Government  did  not  defy  Europe  and  insist  upon  her  rights, 
which  would  have  been  an  insane  proceeding,  it  became  very 
unpopular.      For  this  reason,  as  well  as  for  despotic  tend- 

Overthrow     encies,  Otto  was  driven  from  power  in  1862  by  an  insurrec- 

of  Otto.         tion,  and  left  Greece,  never  to  return. 

A  new  king  was  secured  in  the  person  of  a  Danish  prince, 
who  became  George  I,  in  1863,  and  who  still  rules,  a  brother 
of  the  present  King  of  Denmark  (1909).  That  his  popu- 
larity might  be  strengthened  at  the  very   outset,  England 

The   Ionian  in  1864  ceded  to  the  kingdom  the  Ionian  Islands,  which  she 

Islands.  ]^^^   j^gld    since    1815.      This    was   the   first    enlargement    of 

the  kingdom  since  its  foundation.  A  new  constitution  was 
established  (1864)  which  abolished  the  Senate  and  left  all 
parliamentary  power  in  the  hands  of  a  single  assembly, 
the  Boule,  elected  by  universal  suffrage,  and  consisting  of 
192  members,  with  a  four-year  term.  Political  parties  have 
been  little  more  than  personal  or  local  coteries,  struggling 
for  office  as  a  means  of  livelihood.  In  1881,  mainly  through 
the  exertions  of  England,  the  Sultan  was  induced  to  cede 

Annexation   Thessaly  to  Greece,  and  thus  a  second  enlargement  of  terri- 
'  tory   occurred.     This  was  in   accordance  with  the  promise 


/ 


UNREST  IN  THE  BALKAN  STATES  635 

of  the  Congress  of  Berlin  that  the  Greek  frontier  should  be 
"  rectified." 

In  1897  Greece  declared  war  against  Turkey,  aiming  at 
the  annexation  of  Crete,  which  had  risen  in  insurrection 
against  Turkey.  Greece  was  easily  defeated,  and  was  forced 
to  cede  certain  parts  of  Thessaly  to  Turkey  and  give  up  the 
project  of  the  annexation  of  Crete.  After  long  negotia- 
tions among  the  powers,  the  latter  island  was  made  auton- 
omous under  the  suzerainty  of  the  Sultan,  and  under  the 
direct  administration  of  Prince  George,  a  son  of  the  King 
of   Greece,^    who    remained    in   power   until    1906. 

Greece  is  not  in  sound  financial  condition.  Her  debt  is 
very  large,  having  grown  owing  to  armaments,  the  building 
of  railroads,  and  the  digging  of  canals.  The  country  has 
advanced  in  population  and  now  numbers  about  two  and 
a  half  millions.  Her  wealth  has  increased,  and  much  has 
been  accomplished  in  the  direction  of  popular  education. 
Her  parliamentary  history  has  been  troubled  by  incessant  \y 
factional  disputes.  Since  the  accession  of  the  present  King 
in  1863  there  have  been  about  fifty  ministries.  It  is  esti- 
mated that  the  Greeks  now  number  about  eight  millions. 
The  large  majority,  therefore,  live  outside  the  Greek 
kingdom. 

None  of  these  Balkan  states  is  satisfied  with  its  present  Aspirations 

boundaries.      Roumania  wishes  to  include  in  the  kingdom  the  °^  *^^ 

SRlksm 
Roumanians  of  Russian  Bessarabia,  and  of  eastern  Hungary,  g^^^gg 

Servians  dream  of  a  Greater  Servia,  to  include  those  of 
their  race  in  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  and  southern  Hungary, 
a  dream  that  recent  events  seem  to  have  forever  dissi- 
pated.    Bulgarians     desire     the     annexation     of    parts     of 

*  A  constitution  was  promulgated  for  Crete  in  1899  which  has  since 
been  superseded  by  the  constitution  of  1907,  which  provides  for  an  as- 
sembly of  sixty-five  members,  elected  for  three  years.  The  High  Com- 
missioner, or  chief  executive,  is  appointed  by  the  King  of  Greece  with 
the  assent  of  the  four  protecting  powers.  Great  Britain,  France,  Russia, 
and  Italy.  Questions  concerning  the  foreign  relations  of  Crete  are  de- 
termined by  the  representatives  of  these  powers. 


6'36       DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


y 


Maceilonia,  or  all  of  it.  The  Greeks  desire  IMacedonia  and 
Crete.  They  dream  of  a  Greater  Greece,  dominating  the 
j.-Egea.n. 

Servian,  Bulgarian,  and  Greek  rivalries  meet  in  the  plains 
of  Macedonia,  which  each  country  covets,  and  which  is  in- 
habited by  representatives  of  all  these  peoples  hopelessly 
intermixed.  The  problem  of  Macedonia  is  further  com- 
plicated by  the  rivalry  of  the  great  powers,  and  by  the 
transformation    which   Turkey   is   herself   undergoing. 

REVOLUTION  IN  TURKEY 

The  Eastern  Question  entered  upon  a  new  and  startling 
phase  in  the  summer  of  1908.      In  July  a  swift,  sweeping, 
and   pacific    revolution   occurred   in   Turkey.       The   Young 
The  Young    Turks,  a  liberal,  revolutionary,  constitutional  party,  dom- 
Turks.  inated  by  the  political  principles  of  western  Europe,  seized 

control  of  the  government,  to  the  complete  surprise  of  the 
diplomatists  and  public  of  Europe.  This  party  consisted  of 
those  who  had  been  driven  from  Turkey  by  the  despotism 
of  the  Sultan,  Abdul  Hamid  II,  and  were  resident  abroad, 
chiefly  in  Paris,  and  of  those  who,  still  living  in  Turkey,  dis- 
sembled their  opinions  and  were  able  to  escape  expulsion.  Its 
members  desired  the  overthrow  of  the  despotic,  corrupt,  and 
inefficient  government,  and  the  creation  in  its  place  of  a 
modern  liberal  system,  capable,  by  varied  and  thoroughgoing 
reforms,  of  ranging  Turkey  among  progressive  nations. 
Weaving  their  conspiracy  in  silence  and  with  remarkable 
adroitness,  they  succeeded  in  drawing  into  it  the  Turkish 
army,  hitherto  the  solid  bulwark  of  the  Sultan's  power. 
Then,  at  the  ripe  moment,  the  army  refused  to  obey  the 
Sultan's  orders,  and  the  conspirators  demanded  peremptorily 
by  telegraph  that  the  Sultan  restore  the  Constitution  of 
1876,  a  constitution  granted  by  the  Sultan  in  that  year 
merely  to  enable  him  to  weather  a  crisis,  and  which,  having 
quickly  served  the  purpose,  had  been  immediately  suspended 
and  had  remained  suspended  ever  since.     The  Sultan,  seeing 


Revolution 
of  July 
1908. 


TURKEY  A  CONSTITUTIONAL  STATE       637 

the  ominous   defection  of  tlie  army,  complied  at  once  with  Restoration 
the  demands  of  the  Young  Turks,  "  restored  "  on  July  24th  °^  *^« 
the  Constitution  of  1876,  and  ordered  elections  for  a  parlia-  ^.^^ 
ment,    which   should   meet   in    November.     Thus   an    odious 
tyranny  was  instantly  swept  away.     It  was  a  veritable  coup 
d'etat,  this  time  effected,  not  by  some  would-be  autocrat,  but 
by  the  army,  usually  the  chief  support  of  despotism  or  of  the 
authority  of  the  monarch,  now,  however,  the  chief  instrument 
for  the  achievement  of  freedom  for  the  democracy.     This 
military  revolution,  completely  successful  and  almost  blood- 
less, was  received  with  incredible  enthusiasm  throughout  the 
entire  breadth  of  the   Sultan's   dominions.     Insurgents   and  Apparent 
soldiers,  Mohammedans  and  Christians,  Greeks,  Serbs,  Bui-  unanimity 
garians,  Albanians,  Armenians,  Turks,  all  joined  in  jubilant  ^Q^gj^gnf 
celebrations  of  the  release  from  intolerable  conditions.     The 
most  astonishing  feature  was  the  complete  subsidence  of  the 
racial  and  religious  hatreds  which  had  hitherto  torn  and  rav- 
aged the  Empire  from  end  to  end.     The  revolution  proved  to 
be  the  most  fraternal  movement  in  modern  history.     Pictur- 
esque and  memorable  were  the  scenes  of  universal  reconcilia- 
tion.     The  ease  and  suddenness  with  which  this  astounding 
change  was  effected  proved  the  universality  of  the  detesta- 
tion of  the  reign  and  methods  of  Abdul  Hamid  II  through- 
out all  his  provinces  and  among  all  his  peoples. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that,  since  the  defeat  of  Russia 
by  the  Japanese  in  1904-05,  and  apparently  as  a  conse- 
quence of  that  defeat,  autocracy  has  been  greatly  undermined 
in  eastern  Europe,  its  last  stronghold.  Russia  has  its  Duma, 
Persia  in  Asia  its  constitution,  Austria  its  universal  suf- 
frage, Turkey  its  new  regime. 

The  Young  Turks,  who  thus  seized  control  of  the  gov- 
ernment in  July  1908,  forcing  the  Sultan  to  obey  their 
orders,  illustrated  excellently  two  of  the  dominant  passions 

of  the  nineteenth  centurv,  the  spirit  of  nationality  and  the  . 

.  .  A  modern- 

spirit  of  democracy.      They  wished  to  modernize  and  ener-  j^ed 

gize   their   country   by   comprehensive   reforms   in   civil   ad-  Turkey 


638      DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

ministration,  in  the  judicial  system,  in  tlie  army  and  navy, 
in  education,  and  in  economic  conditions.  Thus  Turkey, 
modern  and  liberal,  would  be  strong  enough  in  the  loyalty  and 
well-being  of  its  citizens  to  assert  its  position  in  the  world 
as  one  of  the  family  of  nations.  The  Young  Turks  were 
a  patriotic  and  liberal  party,  intent  upon  maintaining  the 
integrity  of  the  Empire,  and  upon  gaining  political  and 
civil  freedom  for  the  people.  Might  not  the  old  racial  and 
religious  feuds  disappear  under  a  new  regime,  where  each 
locality  would  have  a  certain  autonomy,  large  enough  to 
insure  essential  freedom  in  religion  and  in  language .?  Might 
not  a  strong  national  patriotism  be  developed  out  of  the 
polyglot  conditions  by  freedom,  a  thing  which  despotism 
had  never  been  able  to  evoke.?  Might  not  Turkey  become 
a  stronger  nation  by  adopting  the  principle  of  true  tolera- 
tion toward  all  her  various  races  and  religions.''  Had  not 
the  time  come  for  the  elimination  of  these  primitive  but 
hardy  prejudices  and  animosities.'*  Might  not  races  and 
creeds  be  subordinated  to  a  large  and  essential  unity.'*  Might 
this  not  be  the  final,  though  unexpected,  solution  of  the 
famous  Eastern  Question?  Such,  at  least,  was  the  evident 
hope  of  the  Young  Turks.  They  desired  to  realize  the 
social  solidarity  represented  in  their  cry,  "  One  Flag,  One 
People."  But  at  best  the  problem  of  so  vast  a  transforma- 
tion would  be  very  difficult.  The  unanimity  shown  in  the 
joyous  destruction  of  the  old  system  might  not  be  shown 
in  the  construction  of  the  new,  as  many  precedents  in  Euro- 
pean history  proved.  If  Turkey  were  left  alone  to  con- 
centrate her  entire  energy  upon  the  impending  work  of 
reform,  she  might  perhaps  succeed.  But  she  was  not  to 
be  left  alone  now  any  more  than  she  had  been  for  centuries. 
Attitude  of  The  Eastern  Question  has  long  perplexed  the  powers  of 
foreign  Europe,   and  has   at  the  same  time  lured  them  on  to   seek 

their  own  advantage  in  its  labyrinthine  mazes.  It  is  con- 
spicuously an  international  problem.  But  the  internal  re- 
form of  Turkey  might  profoundly  alter  her  international 


BREACHES  OF  THE  TREATY  OF  BERLIN  639 

position  by  increasing  the  power  of  the  Empire.     Thus  it 
came    about   that    the   July    Revolution    of    1908   instantly 
riveted  the  attention  of  European  powers  and  precipitated 
a  series  of  startling  events.     Might  not  a  reformed  Turkey, 
animated   with   a   new  national   spirit,   with   her   army   and 
finances  reorganized  and  placed  upon  a  solid  basis,  attempt 
to  recover  complete  control  of  some  of  the  possessions  which, 
as  we  have  seen,  had  been  really,  though  not  nominally  and 
technically,  torn  from  her — Bosnia,  Herzegovina,  Bulgaria, 
Crete,  possibly  Cyprus,  possibly  Egypt.?      There  was  very 
little  evidence  to  show  that  the  Young  Turks  had  any  such 
intention    or   dreamed   of   entering   upon    so    hazardous    an 
adventure.     Indeed,  it  was  quite  apparent  that  they  asked 
nothing  better  than  to  be  left  alone,  fully  recognizing  the 
intricacy  of  their  immediate  problem,  the  need  of  quiet  for  its 
solution.     But  the  extremity  of  one  is  the  opportunity  of 
another. 

On    October    3rd    Emperor    Francis    Joseph    of  Austria-  Austria- 
Hungary  announced,  through  autograph  letters  to  various     "  ^^  j 
*='''.  ...  .  .       annexes 

rulers,  his  decision  to  incorporate  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  Bosnia  and 

definitively  within  his  empire.       These  were  Turkish  prov-  Herzego- 
inces,  handed  over  by  the   Congress   of  Berlin  in   1878   to  '^^^^' 
Austria-Hungary    for    "  occupation "    and    administration, 
though   they   still   remained   officially   under   the   suzerainty 
of  the  Porte.      On  October  5th  Prince  Ferdinand  of  Bui-  Bulgaria 
garia   proclaimed,    amid  great   ceremony,   the   complete   in-  .  ^^  ^^^^     ^ 
dependence  of  Bulgaria  from  Turkish  suzerainty,   and   as-  gnce. 
sumed  the  title  of  King.     Two  days  later  the  Greek  popula- 
tion of  the  island  of  Crete  repudiated  all  connection  with 
Turkey  and  declared  for  union  with  Greece.     On  the  same 
day,  October  7th,  Francis  Joseph  issued  a  proclamation  to 
the  people  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  announcing  the  annex- 
ation of  those  provinces.     Against  this  action  Servia  pro- 
tested vigorously  to  the  powers,  her  parliament  was  imme- 
diately convoked,  and  the  war  spirit  flamed  up  and  threat- 
ened to  get  beyond   control.     Ferdinand  was   prepared  to 


640      DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 


defend  the  independence  of  Bulgaria  by  going  to  war  with 
Turkey,  if  necessary. 

These  startling  events  immediately  aroused  intense  excite- 
ment throughout  Europe.  They  constituted  violent  breaches 
of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin.  The  crisis  precipitated  by  the 
actions  of  Austria-Hungary  and  Bulgaria  brought  all  the 
great  powers,  signatories  of  that  treaty,  upon  the  scene. 
It  became  quickly  apparent  that  they  did  not  agree.  Ger- 
many made  it  clear  that  she  would  support  Austria,  and  Italy 
seemed  likely  to  do  the  same.  The  Triple  Alliance,  there- 
fore, remained  firm.  In  another  group  were  Great  Britain, 
France,  and  Russia,  their  precise  position  not  clear,  but 
plainl}^  irritated  at  the  defiance  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin. 
A  tremendous  interchange  of  diplomatic  notes  ensued,  of 
which  the  public  is  not  fully  informed. 
The  powers  Gradually,  however,  the  situation  cleared,  and  the  war 
do  not  cloud,  the  most  threatening  that  had  loomed  over  Europe 

in  many  years,  disappeared.  On  examination  and  reflection 
certain  facts  stood  forth  indubitable.  It  was  evident  that 
Austria  would  not  recede  from  the  annexation  of  Bosnia 
and  Herzegovina,  that  she  was  prepared  for  war,  and 
would  be  supported  by  Germany.  Russia,  lamed  by  the 
disastrous  war  with  Japan,  with  her  army  disorganized  and 
her  finances  in  bad  condition,  was  in  no  position  to  play 
her  usual  role  of  protector  of  the  Balkan  Slavs.  More- 
over, she  was  bound  by  a  treaty  with  Austria,  which  had 
hitherto  been  known  only  to  a  few,  to  consent  to  the  very 
action  Austria  had  taken.  Great  Britain  and  France  were 
not  disposed  or  able  to  go  to  war  with  the  two  great  military 
monarchies  of  central  Europe,  even  had  the  reason  seemed 
sufficient.  On  the  other  hand,  as  signatories  of  the  Treaty 
of  Berlin,  they  could  not  consent  to  the  flouting  of  that 
agreement  by  one  of  its  parties  without  a  serious  loss  of 
self-respect  and  prestige.  Meanwhile,  the  Turks  protested 
against  these  infractions  of  their  rights,  but  with  admirable 
self-control  refrained  from  warlike  acts. 


prevent 

these 

breaches 

of  the 

Berlin 

Treaty. 


PREDICAMENT  OF  SERVIA  641 

The  British  Foreign  Minister,  Sir  Edward  Grey,  an- 
nounced that  Great  Britain  could  not  admit  "  the  right  of 
any  power  to  alter  an  international  treaty  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  other  parties  to  it,  and  it,  therefore,  refuses  to 
sanction  any  infraction  of  the  Berlin  Treaty  and  declines  to 
recognize  what  has  been  done  until  the  views  of  the  other 
powers  are  known,  especially  those  of  Turkey,  which  is  more 
directly  concerned  than  any  one  else." 

Thereupon  Turkey  and  Bulgaria  announced  themselves 
as  in  favor  of  peace.  Austria-Hungary  let  it  be  known  that, 
while  she  would  not  give  up  the  annexation  of  the  provinces, 
she  was  not  unwilling  to  compensate  Turkey  for  their  loss. 
The  Greeks  manifested  a  disposition  to  wait  a  while  before 
consummating  their  plan  in  regard  to  Crete.  Russia, 
France,  and  England  urged  the  calling  of  a  congress  to 
take  the  whole  subject  under  consideration,  a  suggestion 
which  was  not  accepted.  Since  November  1908  the  tangle 
has  been  unraveling.  Austria-Hungary  and  Bulgaria  are 
negotiating  with  Turkey  for  the  recognition  of  the  status 
quo,  willing  to  indemnify  Turkey  by  cash  payments  for 
her   losses. 

Of  all  the  states  the  most  aggrieved  is  Servia,  and  the  Servia. 
most  helpless.  For  years  the  Servians  have  entertained  the 
ambition  of  uniting  Servia,  Bosnia,  Herzegovina,  and  Monte- 
negro, peopled  by  members  of  the  same  Servian  race,  thus 
restoring  the  Servian  empire  of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  gain- 
ing access  to  the  sea.  This  plan  is  blocked,  apparently 
forever.  Servia  cannot  expand  to  the  west,  as  Austria 
bars  the  way  with  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina.  She  cannot 
reach  the  sea.  She  alone  of  all  the  states  in  Europe,  with 
the  exception  of  Switzerland,  is  in  this  predicament.  Thus 
she  can  get  her  products  to  market  only  with  the  consent 
of  other  nations.  Feeling  that  she  must  thus  become  a 
vassal  state,  probably  to  her  enemy,  Austria-Hungary,  seeing 
all  possibility  of  expansion  ended,  all  hopes  of  combining  the 
Serbs  of  the  Balkans  under  her  banner  frustrated,  the  feeling 


642      DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EI^IPIRE 


Opening 

of  the 

Turkish 

Parliament. 


The 

counter- 
revolution 
of  April, 
1909. 


The  Young 
Turks 
regain 
control. 


was  strong  that  war,  even  against  desperate  odds,  was 
preferable  to  strangulation. 

The  remarkable  aspect  of  the  whole  history  was  that 
the  reforming  Young  Turk  party  was  able  to  survive  blows 
so  damaging  to  Turkey's  prestige,  to  pursue  a  moderate 
policy  when  a  warlike  one  would  have  been  most  natural. 
Meanwhile,  the  new  Turkish  Parliament  had  been  chosen, 
and  was  formall}^  opened  by  the  Sultan  on  December  17, 
1908,  amid  great  enthusiasm.  It  consisted  of  two  chambers, 
a  Senate,  appointed  by  the  Sultan,  and  a  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties, elected  by  the  people,  in  the  ratio  of  one  member  for 
every  fifty  thousand  males  of  the  population. 

But  shortly  events  of  a  startling  nature  occurred,  which 
seemed  to  mean  the  abrupt  termination  of  this  experiment 
in  constitutional  and  parliamentary  government,  and  to  seal 
the  doom  of  the  Young  Turks.  Their  power  rested  on 
their  control  of  the  army.  Suddenly  that  control  appeared 
to  vanish.  On  April  13,  1909,  without  wai-ning,  thousands 
of  troops  in  Constantinople  broke  into  mutiny,  denounced 
the  Young  Turks  as  tyrants,  surrounded  the  Parliament 
House  and  the  War  Office,  and  demanded  the  removal  of  the 
ministry  and  of  the  president  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 
Constantinople  was  in  a  panic.  There  was  much  looting 
of  houses  and  some  loss  of  life.  The  Minister  of  Justice 
was  killed,  the  Minister  of  Marine  was  wounded.  Promi- 
nent Young  Turk  leaders  fled  for  their  lives.  The  city  was 
terrorized.  At  the  same  time  sickening  massacres  occurred 
in  Asia  Minor,  particularly  at  Adana,  showing  that  the 
religious  and  racial  animosities  of  former  times  had  lost 
none  of  their  force.  It  seemed  that  the  new  regime  was 
about  to  founder  utterly.  A  counter-revolution  was  to  undo 
the  work  of  the  revolution  of  July. 

But  the  counter-revolution  lasted  just  eleven  days.  The 
Young  Turks  did  not  lie  down  supinely,  but  at  once  joined 
issue  with  the  insurgents.  Mobilizing  quickly  the  troops 
which  were  loyal  to  them  in  Salonika,  Adrianople,  and  other 


OVERTHROW  OF  ABDUL  HAMID  II         643 

places   they  began   a  march  upon   the   capital,   resolved   to 

wrest  it  from  the  grasp  of  the  reactionary  party.      They 

entered  it  on  April  ^4th,  and  after  many  hours  of  fighting 

gained   complete   control.       Thus,    for   the   first   time   since 

1453,  Constantinople  was  taken  by  an  attacking  araiy.     It 

is   interesting   to   note   that   the   rapid   interplay   of   nation 

upon  nation,  so  striking  a  characteristic  of  the  present  age, 

was  illustrated  here.      The  method  followed  in  the  capture 

of  the  city  was  suggested  by  a  chief  of  staflP,  who  had  seen 

it  applied  successfully  by  the  Japanese  in  Manchuria  during 

the  war  with  Russia. 

The  Young  Turks  were  again  in  power.      Holding  that 

the  mutiny  had  been  inspired  and  organized  by  the  Sultan, 

who  had  corrupted  the  troops  so  that  he  might  restore  the 

old  regime,  they  resolved  to  terminate-  his  rule.       On  April  Deposition 

27th  Abdul   Hamid   II   was   deposed,   and   v/as   immediately  ^^  Abdul 

'     .,  .        .  1     Hamid  IL 

taken  as  a  prisoner  of  state  to  Salonika,  a  city  intensely 

loyal  to  the  reformers.  Thus  ended  a  i-eign  of  thirty-three 
years,  a  shameful  chapter  in  Turkish  history.  Under  Abdul 
Hamid  II  Turkey  had  lost  extensive  territories — Servia, 
Bulgaria,  Bosnia,  Herzegovina,  Crete,  Cyprus,  and,  for  all 
practical  purposes,  Egypt  and  the  Soudan ;  had  experienced 
extreme  demoralization  in  every  branch  of  the  public  service; 
and  had  become  virtually  bankrupt.  Only  in  the  army 
had  any  constructive  work  been  accomplished.  This,  re- 
modeled and  drilled  by  German  officers,  had  revealed  its 
quality  in  the  Turco-Greek  War  of  189T,  and  is  now  an 
efficient  instrument  for  progress  in  the  hands  of  the  re- 
formers. 

Abdul  Hamid  II  was  succeeded  by  his  brother,  whom  he  Mohammed 
had  kept   imprisoned   many   years.     The   new   Sultan,   Mo-  ^• 
hammed  V,  was  in  his  sixty-fourth  year.     He  at  once  ex- 
pressed his   entire   sympathy  with  the   aims   of  the  Young 
Turks,  his  intention  to  be  a  constitutional  monarch. 

Thus  the  Young  Turks  find  their  power  consolidated  and 
increased  as  a  result  of  these  events.     Whether  they  will 


eu      DISRUPTION  OF  THE  OTTOMAN  EMPIRE 

be  able  to  raise  an  ignorant  and  impoverished  people, 
debased  by  long-  misrule,  to  a  state  of  enliglitenment  and 
prosperity',  will  be  able  to  render  them  capable  of  self- 
government,  the  future  alone  can  tell.  Even  if  they  reveal 
the  mighty  statesmanship  required,  will  they  be  permitted 
to  work  out  their  own  salvation?  Will  the  European  powers 
abandon  the  ambitions  they  have  cherished  for  centuries 
of  aggrandizement  at  the  expense  of  Turkey?  Is  not  the 
real  reformation  of  the  Turkish  Empire  the  last  thing  they 
desire?  Will  they  not  take  advantage  of  future  troubles 
likely  to  anse?  Will  they,  indeed,  not  cause  troubles 
themselves  in  order,  under  their  cover,  to  advance  their  own 
interests?  The  Eastern  Question  is  probably  not  yet  solved. 
Meanwhile,  the  annexation  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  by 
Austria-Hungary,  and  the  independence  of  Bulgaria,  have 
been  formally  recognized  by  the  signatories  of  the  Treaty 
of  Berlin. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 
RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

THE  REIGN  OF  ALEXANDER  I 

Russia  in  1815  was  the  largest  state  in  Europe,  and 
was  a  still  larger  Asiatic  empire.  It  extended  in  unbroken 
stretch  from  the  German  Confederation  to  the  Pacific 
Ocean.  Its  population  was  about  45,000,000.  Its  Euro- 
pean territory  covered  about  2,000,000  square  miles.  It 
was  inhabited  by  a  variety  of  races,  but  the  principal  one  was 
the  Slavic.  Though  there  were  many  religions,  the  religion 
of  the  court  and  of  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  population 
was  the  so-called  Greek  Orthodox  form  of  Christianity. 
Though  various  languages  were  spoken,  Russian  was  the 
chief  one.  The  Russians  had  conquered  many  peoples  in 
various  directions.  A  considerable  part  of  the  former  King-  Russian 
dom  of  Poland  had  been  acquired  in  the  three  partitions  *^°"*l^^s  s* 
at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  more  in  1815. 
Here  the  people  spoke  a  different  language,  the  Polish, 
and  adhered  to  a  different  religion,  the  Roman  Catholic. 
In  the  Baltic  provinces,  Esthonia,  Livonia,  and  Courland, 
the  upper  class  was  of  German  origin  and  spoke  the  German 
language,  while  the  mass  of  peasants  were  Finns  and  Lithu- 
anians, speaking  different  tongues.  All  the  inhabitants 
were  Lutherans.  Finland  had  recently  been  conquered  from 
Sweden.  The  languages  spoken  there  were  Swedish  and 
Finnish,  and  the  religion  was  Lutheran.  To  the  east  and 
south  were  peoples  of  Asiatic  origin,  many  of  them  Moham- 
medans in  religion.  There  were  in  certain  sections  con- 
siderable bodies  of  Jews. 

All  these  dissimilar  elements  were  bound  together  by  their 
allegiance  to  the  sovereign,  the  Tsar,  a  monarch  of  absolute, 

645 


6-^6       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


The 
nobility. 


unlimited  power.  There  were  two  classes  of  society  in 
Russia — tlie  nobility  and  the  peasantry.  The  large  ma- 
jority of  the  latter  were  serfs  of  the  Tsar  and  the  nobility. 
The  nobility  numbered  about  140,000  families.  Some  of 
the  nobles  were  very  wealthy.  It  is  estimated  that  1,500 
of  them  possessed  more  than  a  thousand  serfs  each,  that 
2,000  others  possessed  over  five  hundred  each,  while  17,000 
possessed  more  than  two  hundred  each.  But  more  than 
four-fifths  of  them,  that  is,  about  120,000  were  quite  poor, 
with  only  a  few  serfs  each.  The  nobles  secured  offices 
in  the  army  and  the  civil  service.  They  were  exempt  from 
many  taxes,  and  enjoyed  certain  monopolies.  Their  power 
over  their  serfs  was  extensive  and  despotic.  They  enforced 
obedience  to  their  orders  by  the  knout  and  by  banishment 
to  Siberia.  The  middle  class  of  well-to-do  and  educated 
bourgeoisie,  increasingly  important  in  the  other  countries 
of  Europe,  practically  did  not  exist  in  Russia.  Russia  ^vas 
an  agricultural  country,  whose  agriculture,  moreover,  was 
very  prim.itive  and  inefficient.  It  was  a  nation  of  serfs 
and  of  peasants  little  better  off  than  the  serfs.  This  class 
was  wretched,  uneducated,  indolent,  prone  to  drink  excess- 
ively. In  the  "  mir,"  or  village  community,  however,  it 
possessed  a  rudimentary  form  of  communism  and  limited 
self-government. 

Over  this  vast  and  ill-equipped  nation  ruled  the  Autocrat 
of  All  the  Russias,  or  Tsar,  an  absolute  monarch,  whose 
decisions,  expressed  in  the  form  of  ukases  or  decrees,  Avere 
Alexander  I,  the  law  of  the  land.  The  ruler  in  1815  was  Alexander  I, 
a  man  thirty-eight  years  of  age.  Ascending  the  throne 
in  1801,  he  played  a  commanding  role  in  the  later  Napoleonic 
era.  Under  him  Russia  took  a  leading  part  in  the  politics 
and  wars  of  Europe.  AlHed  with  Napoleon  in  1807,  he  broke 
away  from  him  in  1811,  and  from  that  time  was  his  constant 
and  powerful  foe.  In  early  life  he  had  had  as  tutor  Colonel 
Laharpe,  a  Swiss,  who  inspired  principles  of  liberalism  and 
humanitarianism  in  the  mind  of  liis  quick  and  receptive  pupil. 


The 
peasantry, 


1777-1825. 


LIBERALISM  OF  ALEXANDER  I  647 

For   several   years   after   his   accession   he    followed   a   pro- 
gressive  and  reforming  policy.       The  times,  however,  were 
not  propitious   for  any  sweeping  changes.      From  1805  to 
1815  Russia  was  almost  incessantly  at  war,  and  it  is  esti- 
mated that  she  lost  in  these  wars  nearly  a  million  and  a 
quarter  of  men,  most  of  whom  died  from  sickness   or  the 
privations    of  war,   rather   than    in   battle.       The   national 
debt  and  the  burden  of  taxation  had  necessarily  been  im- 
mensely  augmented.       Moreover,   blocking    the   way    of   re- 
form was  an  administrative  service  thoroughly  honeycombed 
with  corruption,   so   that  even  the  official  historian  of  the 
period   after   1815   could  only   say,   "  Everything  was   cor-  The 
rupt,  everything  unjust,  everything  dishonest."      Such  con-  corruption 
ditions    constituted   a   serious   restraint   upon   the   initiative  gQ^grn- 
and  work  of  the  ruler.  ment. 

In  1815  Alexander  I  stood  forth  as  the  most  liberal 
sovereign  on  any  of  the  great  thrones  of  Europe.  In  the 
reorganization  of  Europe  in  1814  and  1815  he  was,  on  the 
whole,  a  liberal  force.  He  it  was  who  insisted  upon  reason- 
ably generous  terms  to  France,  on  the  part  of  the  victorious 
allies ;  who  insisted  that  Louis  XVIII  should  grant  con- 
stitutional liberties  to  the  French  people ;  who,  at  the 
Congress  of  Vienna,  favored,  though  ineffectually,  the 
aspirations  of  the  German  people  for  a  larger  political 
life. 

He  showed  his  liberal  tendencies  even  more  unmistakably 
in  his  Polish  policy.  He  succeeded  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  in  securing  most  of  the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw, 
which  he  now  transformed  into  the  Kingdom  of  Poland.  Poland. 
This  was  a  state  of  3,000,000  inhabitants,  with  an  area 
less  than  one-sixth  the  size  of  the  former  Polish  kingdom, 
but  containing  the  Polish  capital,  Warsaw.  This  was  hence- 
forth to  be  an  independent  kingdom,  not  a  part  of  Russia. 
The  only  connection  between  the  two  was  in  the  person  of 
the  ruler.  The  Tsar  of  Russia  was  to  be  King  of  Poland. 
Alexander  intended  to  make  this  revived,  though  incomplete, 


64-8       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

rohiiid,  a  constitutional  state.      He  granted  a  constitution 
in  1815,  which  created  a  Diet  of  two  chambers,  to  meet  every 
two  years,   and   to   have   the   power   to   make   laws    and   to 
examine  the  budget.      He  granted  liberty  of  the  press  and 
of   religion.       The   Polish   language   Avas   to   be   the    official 
language  in  the  administration  and  in  the  army.     Poland  en- 
jo^'ed  freer  institutions  at  this  moment  than  did  either  Prussia 
or  Austria.      The  franchise  was  wider  than  that  of  England 
or  France.     Apparently,  also,  Alexander  considered  his  Pol- 
ish experiment  as  preliminary  to  an  introduction  of  similar 
reforms  in  Russia  also. 
Alexander's       Returning   to    Russia    from  Warsaw,    Alexander    showed 
progressive    ]j^  many  waj^s  his  desire  to  be  a  progressive  and  beneficent 
nolicv  ruler.      He  thought  much  on  what  was  long  the  fundamental 

problem  of  Russia,  the  emancipation  of  the  serfs.  There 
were  16,000,000  peasants  on  the  vast  domains  that  belonged 
to  the  Crown  alone.  The  condition  of  these  he  sought  to 
improve.  But  the  general  problem  was  so  vast,  his  own 
will  so  unsteady,  that  it  was  solved  neither  by  him  nor  by 
his  successor.  It  was,  however,  a  fact  of  importance  that 
a  Tsar  had  conspicuously  indicated  that  this  was  the  great 
national  evil,  which  must  be  removed  before  Russia  could  be- 
come either  free  or  progressive.  The  Emperor's  opinion 
could  not  fail  to  have  a  formative  influence.  Alexander 
devoted  his  attention  also  to  healing  the  wounds  and  repair- 
ing the  waste  of  the  long  wars.  His  activity  was  incessant 
and  varied.  He  endeavored  to  make  the  administration 
efficient,  and  to  hunt  out  and  punish  corruption,  which  had 
flourished  abundantly  during  his  long  absences  and  his  pre- 
occupation with  foreign  aff"airs  and  war,  but  his  success 
was  slight.  Prison  reform  was  undertaken.  Hospitals  and 
asylums  received  generous  support.  That  famine  might  be 
avoided,  in  a  country  where  transportation  was  very  difficult 
owing  to  poor  roads,  he  gave  orders  for  the  establishment 
in  every  district  of  magazines  of  corn.  He  encouraged 
foreign  commerce. 


ALEXANDER  I  AND  METTERNICH         649 

In  foreign  policy,  also,  Alexander  threw  his  influence  on  Liberal 

the  side  of  liberalism,  in  France,  in  Germany,  in  Italy,  even  in  foreign 

uolicv 
Spain ;   supporting   through   his    agents    in    those   countries 

those  who  wished  constitutional  forms  of  government.  Con- 
sequently, for  some  time,  he  was  the  main  obstacle  in  the 
path  of  Metternich,  the  apostle  of  reaction.  As  Mettemich, 
however,  possessed  the  stronger  character,  and  as  Alexander 
was  easily  discouraged,  the  result  of  their  rivalry  was  ulti- 
mately the  triumph  of  the  former.  Metternich  had  exercised 
little  influence  over  Alexander  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna  in 
1814-1815,  but  three  years  later,  at  the  Congress  of  Aix-la-  Alexander 

Chapelle,  he   ceaselessly   played  upon  the  Emperor's   essen-  ^^comes 
.  •   n      ,  •     •  1  •     •  ,        .      .„  /•  Ti        1    reactionary, 

tially  tmiid  nature,  pomtnig  out  the  significance  or  liberal- 
ism, how  it  ended  in  anarchj"^,  the  loss  of  respect  of  all  human 
authority,  how  in  the  interest  of  civilization  it  must  be 
stamped  out.  Illustrations  were  forthcoming  to  point  the 
argniment;  the  election  to  the  French  Chamber  of  Deputies 
of  Radicals ;  the  actions  of  the  German  students ;  the  murder 
of  Kotzebue,  one  of  the  Tsar's  own  agents;  the  mutiny  of 
one  of  the  St.  Petersburg  regiments ;  the  spread  of  secret 
societies.  The  Tsar  was  won  to  a  policy  of  repression, 
and  his  support  was  after  1818  the  main  bulwark  of  Met- 
ternich's  policy  of  Intervention,  which  expressed  Itself  In 
the  various  congresses  and  which  made  the  name  of  the  Holy 
Alliance  a  by-word  among  liberals.  Events  at  home  further 
altered  the  Tsar's  domestic  policy.  He  became  disappointed 
over  the  failure  of  his  attempts  to  give  Poland  constitutional 
liberty.  Those  attempts  were  always  unpopular  In  Russia. 
Why  should  Poland,  the  old  and  dangerous  enemy,  be  fa- 
vored by  generous  concessions  not  awarded  to  Russia  her- 
self? Would  not  such  liberty  be  used  simply  to  build  up 
the  former  nation  to  the  detriment  of  Russia?  Russian  abso-  Friction 
lutlsts  and  reactionaries  were  opposed  on  principle  to  all  with  the 
constitutions,  and  feared  that  the  Tsar's  experiment  might  ^°  ^^' 
be  a  step  toward  the  introduction  of  a  constitutional  regime 
in  Russia  itself.      The  actions  of  the  Poles  served  this  party 


Death 
of  Alex- 
ander I. 


650       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

well,  for  they  took  their  liberties  seriously,  and  the  Diet 
ci-iticised  freely  the  proposals  of  the  Government.  The 
Tsar,  feeling  that  those  whom  he  had  favored  were  un- 
grateful, and  swinging  to  the  conservative  side  in  general, 
began  to  cool.  The  Diet  rejected  in  1820  a  measure  sub- 
mitted by  the  Government.  Alexander  then  modified  the 
constitution,  and  restricted  the  freedom  he  had  granted  by 
excluding  the  public  from  the  sessions  of  the  Diet  and  for- 
bidding the  publication  of  its  debates.  The  liberal  period 
of  a  brief  five  years  was  soon  over. 

The  Poles  replied  by  conspiring.  Profoundly  depressed 
by  what  he  regarded  as  the  ingratitude  of  the  world,  and 
skilfully  terrified  by  Metternich's  analj^sis  of  the  unrest  of 
the  times,  Alexander  became  more  and  more  reactionary, 
and  when  he  died,  on  December  1,  1825,  he  left  an  admin- 
istration dominated  by  a  totally  different  spirit  from  that 
which  had  prevailed  in  the  earlier  years.  The  period  from 
1820  to  1825  was  one  of  reaction  and  repression  through- 
out his  dominions. 


THE  REIGN  OF  NICHOLAS    I 

Alexander  left  no  son  to  succeed  him.  His  nearest  heir 
was  his  brother  Constantine,  who,  however,  had  secretly  re- 
nounced the  crown.  Alexander  had  designated  his  younger 
brother,  Nicholas,  as  his  successor.  The  documents,  how- 
ever, making  this  disposition  had  never  been  published.  The 
result  was  confusion  and  uncertainty  for  some  weeks.  Nich- 
olas refused  to  mount  the  throne,  and  took  the  oath  of 
allegiance  to  Constantine.  Some  days  elapsed  before  Con- 
stantine renounced  his  rights  publicly.  The  opportunity 
was  seized  by  many  malcontents  and  by  the  secret  societies 
which  had  grown  up  under  Alexander.  They  attempted  to 
effect  a  revolution,  whose  precise  aim  was  not  clear.  This 
was  finally  put  down  by  bloodshed  in  the  streets  of  St.  Peters- 
burg. Punishment  was  meted  out .  to  the  ringleaders  with 
great  severity.      Several  were  hanged,  others  were  banished  to 


ACCESSION  OF  NICHOLAS  I  651 

the  Ural  mines  or  to  Siberia.  This  revolt  of  December 
(1825)  only  strengthened  the  hold  of  absolutism  upon 
Russia  by  deepening  the  hostility  of  the  new  ruler  to  all 
liberalism,  associated  in  his  mind  with  disloyalty  and 
anarchy. 

Nicholas  I  was  in  his  thirtieth  year  at  the  time  of  his  Nicholas  I, 
accession.  His  reign  covered  a  generation,  1825-1855,  and 
was  eventful.  His  training  had  not  been  in  politics  or 
administration,  but  in  the  army.  His  mind  was  practical, 
narrow,  rigid,  and  exceedingly  conservative.  He  sought  to 
eradicate  abuses  wherever  he  discovered  them,  but  in  so 
vast  and  centralized  yet  ill-compacted  an  empire  it  was 
impossible  for  the  Emperor  to  control  effectively  the  details 
of  the  government.  His  policy  was  uncompromisingly  ab- 
solutistic,  both  at  home  and  abroad.  He  was  the  great 
bulwark  of  monarchical  authority  in  Europe  for  thirty  years. 
He  carried  out  systematically  and  persistently  that  scheme  Systematic 
of  reaction  into  which  Alexander  had  drifted  during  the  repression, 
closing  years  of  his  reign.  He  sought  to  give  an  entirely 
Russian  tone  to  every  aspect  of  Russian  life.  His  predeces- 
sors since  Peter  the  Great  had  sought  Russia's  advancement 
in  imitation  of  western  Europe,  in  the  introduction  of 
western  customs  and  ideals  and  institutions.  Nicholas 
planted  himself  right  athwart  this  traditional  tendency. 
Russia  must  be  self-sufiScient ;  must  find  within  herself  the 
fundamental,  active  principles  of  her  life. 

For  thirty  years  a  system  of  remorseless,  undeviating  re- 
pression was  steadily  carried  out.  The  two  principal  in- 
struments employed  were  the  secret  police  and  the  censor- 
ship.    The   former,  under  the  name  of  the   Third   Section,  The 

possessed   practically    unlimited   powers    of   life    and    death,  Pol^ce 

•  1  1  system, 

could    arrest,    imprison,    exile,    or    execute    without    let    or 

hindrance.     The   censorship   was    elaborately   and   minutely  The  censor- 
organized,  and  was  most  effective  in  stamping  out  freedom  ship, 
of  the  press  and  of  speech,  though  making  itself  ridiculous 
by  the  senseless  zeal  with  which  it  pursued  its  work.     Musical 


652        RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

notes  were  investigated  on  the  ground  that  conspirators  might 

be  using  them  as  ciphers  for  malevolent  purposes.      It  was 

decreed  that  books  on  anatomy  and  physiology  should  contain 

nothing  that  could  offend  the  sense  of  decency.     Punishments 

were   of  great    severity.       The   most   harmless   word    might 

mean  exile  to  Siberia,  without  any  kind  of  preliminary  trial. 

The   rigor  of  this   regime  increased   as   the   reign   wore  on. 

To  rivet  it  still  tighter,  that  vigilance  should  never  sleep, 

a    committee    was    appointed    in    1848    to    watch    over    the 

censors,  and  later  another  committee  to  watch  over  the  first. 

It   has    been    estimated   that   in    the    twenty    years    between 

1832   and   1852   probably    150,000   persons   were   exiled   to 

Siberia,  suffering  fearful  hardships   on  the  way   and   after 

arrival,  condemned,  as  they  generally  were,  to  work  in  the 

mines.       In   addition,   tens   of   thousands   languished   in   the 

prisons  of  Russia. 

Safeguards         Needless   to  say,  under  such  a  system  no  such  thing  as 

agams  ^  ^^,^^  press  or  a  free  reading;  public  could  possibly  exist. 

the  ideas  of  ^  .        .  ,  •       ,    i- i  i 

western         ^^^  1843  all  the  Russian  journals  combmed  did  not  have  more 

Europe.  than  12,000  subscribers.     That  Russians  might  not  be  con- 

taminated by  the  pernicious  liberal  ideas  of  the  west,  their 
travel  abroad  was  greatly  restricted  by  a  system  of  passports. 
These  passports  were  expensive,  and  were  only  granted  on  the 
consent  of  the  sovereign,  and  then  only  for  a  maximum 
period  of  five  years.  Any  one  outstaying  the  time  per- 
mitted might  have  his  property  in  Russia  confiscated.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  travel  in  Russia  of  foreigners  was 
elaborately  discouraged.  Such  travelers  must  obtain  pass- 
ports from  the  Russian  government,  must  explain  why  they 
were  visiting  that  country,  and  during  their  entire  sojourn 
were  under  police  surveillance. 

Foreign  literature  of  a  liberal  nature  was  rigorously  ex- 
cluded.     While  Nicholas  I  encouraged  Russian  literature  in 

,  ^  .„.     ^    the  forms  that  seemed  harmless,  while  his  reign  was  called 
A  brilliant  i  i      i        i.u 

native  the   "  Augustan    age    of   Russia,"    rendered   notable   by   the 

literature,      poetry  of  Pushkin,  the  novels  of  Dostoievski,  Turgenieff,  and 


POLICY  OF  NICHOLAS  I  653 

Gogol,  while  he  encouraged  research  in  lines  which  he  con- 
sidered legitimate,  and  showed  his  humanitarianism  by  abol- 
ishing capital  punishment,  except  for  high  treason,  at  a 
time  when  the  English  penal  code  was  barbarous  in  its 
severity,  and  while  he  encouraged  the  building  of  railways, 
so  that  at  the  time  of  his  death  there  were  632  miles  in 
operation,  his  reign  was,  on  the  whole,  one  of  repression  and 
national  stagnation.  As  we  have  seen,  Russia  was  as  com- 
pletely as  possible  shut  off  from  the  outside  world.  No 
attempt  was  made  even  to  connect  the  railways  with  the 
systems  of  western  Europe.  In  later  years,  regarding  edu- 
cational institutions  as  "  hotbeds  of  revolution,"  he  prac- 
tically limited  the  number  of  students  at  any  Russian  uni- 
versity, with  the  exception  of  those  pursuing  courses  in 
medicine,  to  three  hundred.  The  result  was  that  in  1853, 
in  a  country  whose  population  was  about  70,000,000,  there 
were  only  about  2,900  students.  Religious  persecution  Religious 
accompanied  political  and  intellectual.  Any  one  renounc-  persecution, 
ing  the  Orthodox  religion  was  punished  with  loss  of  prop- 
erty and  with  eight  to  ten  years  of  hard  labor.  Any  one 
attempting  to  convert  an  Orthodox  believer  was  imprisoned 
from  eight  to  sixteen  months,  and,  for  the  third  offense,  was 
exiled  to  Siberia.  Nicholas,  like  his  predecessor,  was  alive  The  evil  of 
to  the  evils  of  serfdom,  and  during  his  reign  six  committees  serfdom, 
were  appointed  to  study  the  problem,  but  almost  nothing 
was  accomplished.  "  I  do  not  understand,"  he  once  said, 
speaking  as  "  the  first  nobleman  in  Russia,"  "  how  man  came 
to  be  a  thing,  and  I  can  explain  the  fact  only  by  deception 
on  one  side  and  ignorance  on  the  other.  We  must  make 
an  end  to  this.  It  is  better  we  should  give  up,  of  our  own 
account,  that  which  might  otherwise  be  wrested  from  us." 

Nicholas's  foreign  policy  was  marked  by  the  same  char-  The 
acteristics,  and  made  him  hated  throughout  Europe  as  the  foreign 
most  brutal  autocrat  of  Europe.     Nicholas  suppressed  the  ifig^olas  I. 
Polish   insurrection    of    1830-31,    abolished   the   constitution 
granted  by  Alexander  I,  and  incorporated  Poland  in  Russia, 


654       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

thus  ending  tlie  history  of  that  kingdom,  a  history  of  only 
fifteen  years.  He  waged  two  wars  against  Turkey,  previ- 
ously described,  one  in  1828-9,  and  one  in  1853-6.  He 
interfered  decisively  to  suppress  the  Hungarian  revolution- 
ists in  1849,  and  in  German  affairs  he  was  a  factor  of  im- 
portance. His  prestige  was  great  after  1849.  Russia, 
alone  of  the  great  powers,  had  passed  through  the  turbulent 
years  of  1848  and  1849  without  commotion.  She  had  aided 
in  the  restoration  of  the  established  order  elsewhere.  Her 
army,  on  which  nearly  forty  per  cent,  of  her  income  was 
annually  expended,  was  supposed  by  Nicholas  and  by  many 
The  outside  of  Russia  to  be  the  best  in  Europe.     The  Crimean 

Crimean  war,  in  which  Nicholas  became  involved  in  1854,  proved  the 
hollowness  of  this  claim.  That  war  was  an  overwhelming  and 
disillusioning  defeat  for  Russia.  Sebastopol  finally  fell 
after  a  famous  siege.  Russia  had  lost  more  than  250,000 
lives,  and  had  incurred  an  enormous  expenditure.  Another 
campaign  and  the  Empire  might  dissolve  into  the  elements 
from  which  it  had  been  created.  The  prestige  of  Russia, 
so  overwhelming  since  Napoleon's  flight  from  Moscow,  was 
completely  shattered.  The  people  had  acquiesced  in  the 
narrow,  iron  regime  of  Nicholas,  consoling  themselves  with 
the  belief  that  their  country  was  the  greatest  in  Europe, 
that  their  army  was  invincible,  that  their  sovereign  was  the 
most  powerful  monarch  on  the  Continent.  The  falsity  of  all 
The  this  was  now  apparent.     The  Government  was  shown  to  be 

humiliation  as  incompetent  and  impotent  as  it  was  reactionary.      The 
of  Russia.     n^Jlitai-y    organization    was    clearly    as    honeycombed    with 
abuses  as  the  civil.       Though  the  soldiers  were  brave,  the 
generals  were  incapable,  the  officials   corrupt,  the  commis- 
sary department  a  field  of  endless  robbery. 

But  in  this  great  national  humiliation  lay  the  best  hope 
of  the  future.  As  Prussia  arose  and  reformed  her  institu- 
tions after  Jena,  so  did  Russia  after  the  Crimean  war. 
That  war  is  a  landmark  in  her  history,  as  it  inaugurated 
a  period  of  extensive  reorganization  and  improvement. 


THE  SYSTEM  OF  LAND  TENURE  655 

THE  REIGN  OF  ALEXANDER  II 

Nicholas  died  in  1855,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Alexander 
Alexander  II,  who  ruled  from  1855  to  1881.  The  new  Em-  ^^' 
peror  was  in  his  thirty-seventh  year  at  the  time  of  his  accession. 
He  had  received  a  varied  training,  designed  to  equip  him 
for  rule.  Of  an  open  mind,  and  desirous  of  ameliorating  the 
conditions  of  Russian  life,  he  for  some  years  followed  a  policy 
of  reform.  He  relaxed  the  censorship  of  the  press,  and 
removed  most  of  the  restrictions  which  had  been  imposed 
upon  the  universities  and  upon  travel.  Particularly  did 
he  address  himself  to  the  question  of  serfdom. 

To  understand  the  significance  of  the  Edict  of  Emancipa- 
tion, which  was  to  constitute  Alexander  II's  most  legitimate 
title  to  fame,  one  must  first  understand  the  previous  system  Prevailing 

of  land  tenure.      Nearly  all,  practically  nine-tenths,  of  the  system 

.of  land 
arable  land  was  owned  by  the  crown  and  the  royal  princes,  tenure. 

and  by  the  one  hundred  and  forty  thousand  families  of  the 

nobility.      The  land  was,  therefore,  generally   held  in  large 

estates.      It  was  owned  by  a  small  minority ;  it  was  tilled 

by  the  millions  of  Russia,  who  were  serfs. 

The  method  of  cultivation  was  as  follows :  each  estate 
was,  as  a  rule,  divided  into  two  parts ;  one  part  reserved 
by  the  owner  for  his  own  use,  and  cultivated  directly  under 
his  supervision;  the  other  assigned  to  his  serfs.  These 
serfs  generally  lived  in  small  villages,  going  out  into  the 
fields  to  till  them,  returning  to  their  villages  at  night. 
The  village  communities,  or  mirs,  regulated  for  their  members  The  mire 
the  cultivation  of  those  lands  especially  allotted  to  them. 
The  serfs  did  not  own  the  land,  but  enjoyed  the  usufruct  of 
it,  were  entitled  to  whatever  they  raised.  In  return  the  mir 
paid  the  landlord  a  fixed  sum  annually.  About  one-half  of 
the  mirs  were  on  crown  lands,  one-half  on  lands  belonging  to 
the  nobility. 

Serfdom,  previously  abolished  in  all  other  European  coun- 
tries,  still  flourished  in  Russia,   and  was   the  basis   of  the 


{j56       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

The  serfs,  economic  and  social  life.  The  serfs  numbered  about  fifty 
millions,  about  23,000,000  on  the  crown  domains,  about  23,- 
000,000  on  the  estates  of  the  nobility,  and  over  3,000,000 
on  the  appanages  of  the  imperial  family  and  in  private 
service  as  house  domestics  and  attendants.  The  serfs  cul- 
tivated, then,  the  lands  allotted  to  the  mir,  and  from  what 
they  raised  they  got  their  sustenance.  But  they  also  cul- 
tivated the  portion  set  apart  for  the  landlord's  own  use. 
They  must  labor  for  him  three  days  a  week.  They  were 
not  slaves  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word.  They  could 
not  be  sold  separately.  But  they  were  attached  to  the  soil, 
could  not  leave  it  without  the  consent  of  the  owner,  and 
passed,  if  he  sold  his  estate,  to  the  new  owner.  The  landlord 
had  the  right  to  inflict  corporal  punishment,  wliich  right, 
though  legally  restricted,  was  practically  uncontrolled.  If 
he  considered  any  of  his  serfs  unduly  troublesome  he  could 
usually  get  the  government  to  force  them  into  the  anny,  or 
send  them  to  Siberia.  In  practice,  the  authority  of  the 
proprietor  was  unlimited.  The  peasant  had  the  use,  but  not 
the  owmership,  of  enough  land  to  support  himself  and  family ; 
but  otherwise  he  was  not  his  own  master. 
Serfdom  Serfdom   was    condemned    on   various    grounds.       It   was 

condemned,  j^^orally  harmful  in  that  it  offended  the  conscience  of  the 
age.  Economically  it  had  not  proved  successful.  Two- 
thirds  of  the  estates  of  private  owners  w^ere  mortgaged  up 
to  their  full  value,  and  while  serfdom  was  not  alone  the 
cause  of  this,  it  was  one  of  the  causes.  Yet  the  institution 
had  influential  support.  The  nobles  looked  upon  their  serfs 
as  the  chief  source  of  their  income.  It  was  customary  in 
speaking  of  a  nobleman's  wealth  not  to  say  that  he  pos- 
sessed so  many  acres,  or  had  an  income  of  so  many  rubles 
a  year,  but  that  he  possessed  so  many  hundreds  of  "  souls." 
It  is  no  occasion  for  surprise,  therefore,  that  although  the 
Emperor,  Alexander  II,  attacked  the  question  immediately 
after  the  close  of  the  Crimean  war,  several  years  elapsed 
before  it  was  solved. 


THE  EMANCIPATION  OF  THE  SERFS       657 

The  crown  serfs  were  in  a  better  position  than  the  serfs  The  Crown 
on  private  estates.  Practically,  their  only  obligation  was  ^^'^^^• 
to  pay  certain  dues  each  year  to  the  State  or  the  imperial 
family,  which  were  considerably  smaller  than  those  paid  by 
the  others  to  their  lords.  They  were,  in  a  sense,  tenants, 
owing  the  equivalent  of  rent.  To  free  them,  all  that  was 
necessary  was  to  abolish  these  dues,  and  to  recognize  the 
serfs  as  owners  of  the  holdings,  which  they  had  been  culti- 
vating, and  to  grant  them  personal  freedom.  No  one  could 
question  the  right  of  the  State  to  do  what  it  would  with 
its  own.  The  liberation  of  these  serfs  was  begun  in  1859, 
though  the  process  was  not  completed  until  1866.  Another 
class,  those  in  domestic  service,  could  easily  be  freed,  but  the 
class  belonging  to  private  landlords  and  attached  to  the  soil 
presented  greater  difficulties,  for  it  was  not  simply  a  question 
of  giving  them  civil  freedom,  but  it  was  a  question  of 
giving  them  land  as  well.  The  Edict  of  Emancipation  The  Edict 
concerned  the  serfs  of  private  landowners,  the  nobles.  Issued  ^^  Emanci- 
March  3,  1861,  it  abolished  serfdom  tliroughout  the  Empire, 
freeing  about  twenty-three  million  serfs,  thus  winning  for 
Alexander  the  title  of  "  the  Tsar  Liberator."  This  mani- 
festo did  not  merely  declare  the  serfs  free  men.  It  under- 
took to  solve  the  far  more  difficult  problem  of  the  ownership  of 
the  soil.  The  Tsar  felt  that  merely  to  give  the  serfs  free- 
dom, and  to  leave  all  the  land  in  the  possession  of  the 
nobles,  would  mean  the  creation  of  a  great  proletariat 
possessing  no  property,  therefore  likely  to  fall  at  once 
into  a  position  of  economic  dependence  upon  the  nobles, 
which  would  make  the  gift  of  freedom  a  mere  mockery. 
Moreover,  the  peasants  were  firmly  convinced  that  they  were 
the  rightful  owners  of  the  lands  which  they  and  their  ances-  The  land 
tors  for  centuries  had  lived  upon  and  cultivated,  and  the 
fact  that  the  landlords  were  legally  the  owners  did  not  alter 
their  opinion.  To  give  them  freedom  without  land,  leaving 
that  with  the  nobles,  who  desired  to  retain  it,  would  be 
bitterly  resented  as  making  their  condition  worse  than  ever. 


658       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


Division  of 
the  land. 


On  the  other  hand,  to  give  them  the  land  with  their  freedom 
would  mean  the  ruin  of  the  nobility  as  a  class,  considered 
essential  to  the  state.  The  consequence  of  this  conflict  of 
interests  was  a  compromise,  satisfactory  to  neither  party, 
but  more  favorable  to  the  nobility  than  to  the  peasants. 

The  lands  were  divided  into  two  parts.  The  landlords 
were  to  keep  one;  the  other  was  to  go  to  the  peasants  in 
the  following  manner:  the  house  and  lot  of  each  peasant 
was  to  become  his  personal  property ;  the  lands  surrounding 
the  callage  were  to  become  the  property  of  the  village,  or 
mir,  to  be  owned  by  the  community  collectively,  but  to 
be  divided  periodically  among  its  members,  according  to  the 
Russian  fashion.^  Such  divisions  were  made  by  lot,  and 
were  merely  temporary,  for  a  period,  varying  in  different  dis- 
tricts, from  three  to  twelve  years,  and  varying  also  with 
the  size  of  the  family.  Collective  ownership  of  general 
farming  land,  private  ownership  of  house  and  lot,  were  thus 
the  modes  of  land  tenure  adopted  at  the  Emancipation.  But 
the  lands,  those  going  to  the  peasants  individually,  and  those 
going  to  the  mir  collectively,  were  not  given  to  them  out- 
right. The  peasant  and  the  mir  must  pay  the  landlord 
for  their  respective  acquisitions.  As  they  could  not  do 
this  themselves,  the  State  was  to  advance  the  money,  which 
was  to  be  paid  back  in  instalments  during  a  period  of 
forty-nine  years.  The  principle  was  the  same  as  that  ap- 
plied later  in  the  land  purchase  laws  for  Ireland.  Thus 
in  time  the  peasants  would  become  individually  and  collect- 
ively the  owners  of  a  part  of  the  soil,  yet  the  former  land- 
owner would  be  paid  for  what  was  taken  from  him.^ 

This  arrangement  was  a  great  disappointment  to  the 
ment  of  the  peasantry.  Their  newly  acquired  freedom  seemed  a  doubtful 
peasantry.     ^^^^  j^  ^^^  j.^l^^  ^^  ^j^j^  method  of  dividing  the  land.     In- 

^  This  arrangement  applied  only  to  those  regions  where  communal 
ownership  was  customary,  namely  the  north,  east,  and  south  of  Russia, 
Where  individual  ownership  was  the  rule,  as  in  Little  Russia  and  Poland, 
the  land  was  apportioned  directly  to  indi^^duals. 

^Domestic  serfs  were  given  freedom,  but  not  land. 


State  aid. 


Disappoint- 


CONTINUANCE  OF  THE  LAND  QUESTION      659 

deed,  the  peasant  could  not  see  that  he  was  profiting  from 
the  change.  Personal  liberty  could  not  mean  much,  when 
the  conditions  of  earning  a  livelihood  became  harder  rather 
than  lighter.  The  peasant  ceased  to  be  bound  to  the  land- 
lord, but  he  was  bound  to  the  mir  all  the  more  closely,  because 
the  mir  was  bound  to  the  State  for  at  least  forty-nine  years 
by  its  obligation  to  pay  the  State  for  the  communal  lands. 
This  meant,  concretely,  a  heavy  land  tax  on  each  peasant. 
Was  anything  gained  in  becoming  a  kind  of  serf  to  the 
State  at  the  moment  of  ceasing  to  be  the  serf  of  a  noble- 
man.? The  peasants  regarded  the  land  as  their  own.  But 
the  State  guaranteed  forever  a  part  to  the  landlords,  and 
announced  that  the  peasants  must  pay  for  the  part  assigned 
to  themselves.  To  the  peasants  this  seemed  sheer  robbery. 
Moreover,  as  the  division  worked  out,  they  found  that  they 
had  less  land  for  their  own  use  than  in  the  pre-emancipation 
days,  and  that  they  had  to  pay  the  landlords,  through 
the  State,  more  than  the  lands  which  they  did  receive  were 
worth.  Moreover,  as  they  were  not  permitted  to  leave  the  mir 
and  seek  their  fortunes  elsewhei'e,  even  the  personal  liberty 
guaranteed  by  emancipation  seemed  hollow.  Evidently  this  The  land 
could  be  no  final  solution  of  the  land  question  for  a  country  ^l^icstioii 
almost  entirely  agricultural.  The  agrarian  question,  in- 
deed, became  steadily  more  and  more  acute  during  the  next 
fifty  years,  and  constitutes  to-day  one  of  the  most  difficult 
problems  in  the  revolution  now  in  progress.  The  peasant 
population  has  in  that  time  vastly  increased,  and  the 
pressure  upon  the  land  has  consequently  grown  greater.  At 
present  the  peasant  has  only  on  an  average  half  as  much  land 
as  he  had  in  1861.  He  lives  necessarily  upon  the  verge 
of  starvation. 

The  emancipation  of  the  serfs  is  seen,  therefore,  not  to 
have  been  an  unalloyed  boon.  Yet  Russia  gained  morally 
in  the  esteem  of  other  nations  by  abolishing  an  indefensible 
wrong.  Theoretically,  at  least,  every  man  was  free.  More- 
over, the  peasants,  though  faring  ill,  yet  fared  better  than 


660       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


Establish- 
ment of 
zemstvos. 


Duties 
of  the 
zemstvos. 


Much  ac- 
complished 
by  the 
zemstvos. 


had  tlio  peasants  of  Prussia  and  Austria  at  the  time  of  their 
liberation.^ 

The  abolition  of  serfdom  was  the  greatest  act  of  Alex- 
ander II's  reign,  but  it  was  only  one  of  several  liberal  measures 
enacted  at  this  time  of  general  enthusiasm.  In  1864<  the 
Emperor  issued  a  decree  establishing  a  certain  measure  of 
self-government.  Tliis  decree  was  based  upon  investigations 
made  by  a  commission  appointed  in  1859.  Russia  is  divided 
into  provinces  and  the  provinces  are  subdivided  into  districts. 
In  each  district  a  popular  assembly  was  now  established, 
called  the  zemstvo,  to  be  chosen  by  the  landowners,  the 
bourgeois,  and  the  peasants  in  the  villages.  The  district 
zemstvos  were  to  choose  representatives,  who  were  to  form 
provincial  zemstvos.  The  zemstvos  were  to  meet  regularly 
once  a  year,  and  were  to  aid  the  Government  in  administra- 
tion. They  were  not  to  be  political  bodies.  It  was  not 
the  intention  of  the  Emperor  to  divide  or  reduce  in  any 
degree  his  autocratic  power.  They  were  to  serve  as  a 
part  of  the  local  administration,  discharging  certain  func- 
tions which  the  smaller  areas,  the  mirs,  could  not  adequately 
perform,  such  as  the  control  of  the  public  highways,  primary 
schools  and  hospitals,  and  the  taking  of  precautions  against 
famine;  in  short,  to  contribute  within  strict  limits  to  the 
material  and  moral  well-being  of  the  people.  These  zemstvos 
were  introduced  gradually  during  the  next  twelve  years,  from 
1864  to  1876.  "  The  zemstvo,"  says  a  leading  authority, 
"  has  done  a  great  deal  to  provide  medical  aid  and 
primary  education  for  the  common  people,  and  it  has  im- 
proved wonderfully  the  condition  of  the  hospitals,  lunatic 
asylums,  and  other  benevolent  institutions  committed  to  its 
charge.  In  its  efforts  to  aid  the  peasantry  it  has  helped 
to  improve  the  native  breeds  of  horses  and  cattle,  and  it 
has  created  a  system  of  obligatory  fire  insurance,  together 


'  On  the  attitude  of  the  nobility  and  peasantry  toward  the  Emancipa- 
tion see  Wallace,  Russia  (Revised  Edition  1905),  442-451.  On  general 
discussion  of  effects  see  Wallace,  452-490. 


REFORM  OF  THE  JUDICIAL  SYSTEM       661 

with  means  for  preventing  and  extinguishing  fires  in  the 
villages,  a  most  important  matter  in  a  country  where  the 
peasants  live  in  wooden  houses,  and  big  fires  are  fearfully 
frequent."  ' 

Though  not  intended  as  political  or  legislative  bodies, 
but  simply  as  aids  to  the  State  in  business  matters,  the 
zemstvos  have,  nevertheless,  been  training  schools  in  political 
co-operation.  Though  their  activity  has  been  interrupted, 
restricted,  nullified,  more  or  less  by  the  central  government, 
yet  they  have  persisted,  have  struck  root  in  the  life  of  the 
nation,  and  have  contributed  to  the  political  education  of 
the  people. 

This  reform  in  administration  was  followed  by  one  in  the  Reform 
judicial  system   (November  1864),  based  upon  a  study  of  °^  *^® 
the  systems  of  Europe  and  the  United  States.      The  judicial  gyg^g^j. 
organization  was  both  corrupt  and  inefficient.      Judges  were 
poorly  paid,  and  might  be  removed  at  any  moment;  trials 
were  conducted  behind  closed  doors  and  in  writing,  a  method 
which  greatly  facilitated  bribery,  a  system  favorable  to  the 
rich,  oppressive  to  the  poor.      Henceforth,  it  was  provided, 
that  judges  should  serve  during  good  behavior,  that  court 
proceedings  should  be  public  and  oral,  and  that  trial  by  jury 
should  be  instituted  for  criminal  cases.     Whatever  its  short- 
comings, the  new  system  was  a  great  improvement  on  the  old. 

Other  lesser  reforms  were  also  carried  through  at  this 
time.  The  censorship  of  the  press  was  somewhat  relaxed, 
the  universities  were  released  from  certain  restrictions  im- 
posed during  the  reign  of  Nicholas  I,  and  secondary  educa-  Educational 
tion  was  improved.  Schools  emphasizing  scientific  education  reform, 
were  founded.  In  1858  the  first  high  school  for  girls  was 
opened,  and  in  the  course  of  six  years  nearly  a  hundred  others 
were  established. 

This  hopeful  era  of  reform  was,  however,  soon  over,  and  End  of  the 
a  period  of  reaction  began,  which  characterized  the  latter  ^^^  °^ 
half  of  Alexander's  reign  and  ended  in  his  assassination  in 

^Wallace.  Russia,  500-501. 


662       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

1881.  There  were  several  causes  for  this  change:  the  vacil- 
lating cluiracter  of  the  monarch  himself,  taking  fright  at  his 
own  work;  the  disappointment  felt  by  many  who  had  ex- 
pected a  millennium,  but  who  found  it  not ;  the  intense  dislike 
of  the  privileged  and  conservative  classes  of  the  measures  just 
described,  a  dislike  which  could  express  itself  in  acts,  inas- 
much as  the  Tsar  confided  the  execution  of  his  measures 
mainly  to  them.  As  a  matter  of  fact  these  measures  were, 
in  application,  distorted  and  even  partially  nullified.  The 
reformers,  hitherto  a  solid  body,  now  split  up  into  groups. 
Public  opinion,  the  motive  force  behind  all  these  changes, 
divided  and  became  less  certain.  The  landlords,  smarting 
under  the  loss  of  their  serfs,  the  serfs  disappointed  at  the  loss 
of  some  of  the  land  which  they  had  been  accustomed  to  culti- 
vate, and  indignant  at  having  to  pay  for  the  land  which  they 
had  acquired,  were  elements  of  disaffection. 
The  Polish  Just  at  this  time,  when  the  attitude  of  the  Emperor  was 
insurrection  changing,  when  public  opinion  was  in  this  fluid,  uncertain 
of  18o3.  state,  occurred  an  event  which  immensely  strengthened  the 
reactionary  forces,  a  new  insurrection  of  Poland.  After 
the  failure  of  their  attempt  to  achieve  independence  in  1831 
the  Poles  had  remained  quiet,  the  quiet  of  despair.  As 
long  as  Nicholas  I  lived  they  were  ruled  with  the  greatest 
severity,  and  they  could  not  but  see  the  impracticability  of 
any  attempt  to  throw  off  their  chains.  But  the  accession 
of  Alexander  II  aroused  hopes  of  better  conditions.  The 
spirit  of  nationalism  revived,  greatly  encouraged  by  the 
success  of  the  same  spirit  elsewhere.  The  Italians  had 
just  realized  their  aspiration,  the  creation  of  an  Italian 
nation — not  solely  by  their  own  efforts,  but  by  the  aid  of 
foreign  nations.  Might  not  the  Poles  hope  for  as  much? 
Alexander  would  not  for  a  moment  entertain  the  favorite 
idea  of  the  Poles,  that  they  should  be  independent.  He 
emphatically  told  them  that  such  a  notion  was  an  idle 
dream,  that  they  "  must  abandon  all  thoughts  of  independ- 
ence, now  and  forever  impossible."      He  would  continue  liis 


INSURRECTION  OF  POLAND  663 

father's  policy,  as  all  that  he  had  done  had  been  "  rightly 
done."  In  practice  for  several  years,  Alexander's  policy 
was  one  calculated  to  agitate  and  arouse,  without  satisfying, 
the  Poles.  Concessions  of  a  liberal  nature  were  made  them, 
only  to  be  followed  by  acts  regarded  as  oppressive  or 
hostile.  The  result  was  that  the  irritation  of  the  Poles  in- 
creased, that  misunderstandings  multiplied,  and  that  finally, 
in  1863,  an  insurrection  broke  out.  It  was  in  no  sense 
as  formidable  as  that  of  1831.  The  Poles  had  now  no 
army,  no  native  government,  no  treasury.  They  had  been 
since  1832  completely  incorporated  in  Russia.  At  no  time 
during  this  insurrection  did  they  control  even  their  capital, 
Warsaw,  which  remained  in  the  power  of  the  regular  Rus- 
sian officials  and  army.  The  fighting  was  entirely  guerrilla 
in  character.  The  aim  of  the  Poles  was  to  make  Poland  The  aims  of 
independent.  This  involved  not  only  making  the  Poland  *^®  Poles, 
of  that  day  a  nation,  but  adding  to  it  the  Lithuanian  prov- 
inces to  the  east,  formerly  a  part  of  Poland,  but  for  ninety 
years,  since  the  first  partition  in  1772,  incorporated  in 
Russia  proper.  At  once  the  intense  national  feeling  of  the 
Russians  was  aroused  by  what  seemed  to  threaten  dismem- 
bennent  of  the  Empire.  Religious  fanaticism  was  also 
aroused.  The  Poles  were  Roman  Catholics,  whereas  the 
Russians  belonged  to  the  Orthodox  Greek  Church.  Thus 
the  Poles  stood  for  schism  in  religion,  as  in  politics.  The 
Tsar,  consequently,  in  his  determination  to  crush  this  sepa- 
ratist spirit,  had  the  support  of  tremendous  national  passions, 
and  his  campaign  was  conducted  w4th  vigor  and  without 
mercy.       The   only  hope   for  the  Poles   lay   in   foreign   in-  The  Poles 

tervention.     In  this  they  were  bitterly  disappointed.     Eng-  ^^^^^^^  ^° 

1     T^  •      •  11-  •        1    •    foreign    aid 

land,  France,   and  Austria   mters^cncd  three  trnies   m   their 

behalf,  but  only  by  diplomatic  notes,  making  no  attempt 
to  give  emphasis  to  their  notes  by  a  show  of  force.  Russia, 
seeing  this,  and  supported  by  Prussia,  treated  their  inter- 
vention as  an  impertinence,  and  proceeded  to  wreak  her 
vengeance.      It  was  a  fearful  punishment  she  meted  out. 


664       RUSSIA  TO  THE  AVAR  WITH  JAPAN 


The  deep- 
seated 
divisions 
of  the 
Poles. 


Russia 
resolves  to 
crush  the 
Polish 
nobility. 


Tlic  dccp-scatcd  historic  evil  of  Polisli  nationality  was 
the  division  of  the  people  into  two  classes,  completely  alien- 
ated from  each  other — tlie  nobles  and  the  peasants.  Indeed, 
the  Poles  were  practically  two  peoples.  The  fusion  of 
the  two  had  never  been  consummated.  The  nobles  were 
the  dominant  class,  and  were  regarded  by  the  peasants  as 
despots  and  oppressors.  As  a  consequence,  the  Polish  peo- 
ple did  not  act  together  as  a  whole.  The  insurrection  of 
1863,  like  its  predecessors,  was  the  work  of  the  nobles.  The 
peasants  remained  inactive,  unmoved  by  the  appeals  of  those 
who  turned  to  them  only  in  adversity,  but  who  treated  them 
contemptuously  and  harshly  in  ordinary  times.  The  Tsar 
determined  to  use  this,  the  fundamental  fact  of  Polish  life, 
as  a  means  of  crushing  the  Polish  nobility,  the  turbulent  in- 
surrectionary class,  by  making  the  Polish  peasants  friendly  to 
Russia.  This  he  accomplished  by  a  decree  of  March  1864, 
which  effected  a  sweeping  agrarian  change.  Practically 
half  of  the  nobles'  lands  were  given  to  the  peasants  as  free- 
holds. The  peasants  were  released  from  all  obligation  to 
cultivate  the  estates  which  remained  the  property  of  the 
nobles.  At  the  same  time  no  change  was  made  in  the  peas- 
ants' former  right  to  use  the  nobles'  forest  and  pasture 
lands,  a  right  very  indefinite  and  yet  real.  This  right 
was  now  preserved  to  them  as  tending  to  win  their  good 
will  still  more,  and  also  as  likely  to  keep  friction  alive 
between  the  nobles  and  the  peasants,  which  in  turn  would 
cause  the  latter  to  look  constantly  to  the  Tsar  for  support 
and  protection.  The  lands  taken  from  the  nobles  vrere  to 
be  paid  for,  not  by  the  peasants  alone  to  whom  they  were 
transferred,  but  by  a  general  land  tax,  which  fell  upon 
all  lands,  that  is,  upon  the  lands  left  to  the  nobles  as 
well  as  those  now  given  to  the  peasants.  The  result  was 
that  the  nobles  would  have  to  pay  a  large  part  of  their 
own  compensation,  an  ingenious  method  of  punishment.  The 
process  amounted  to  a  confiscation  of  a  part  of  their 
property. 


I 


RESULTS  OF  THE  POLISH  INSURRECTION    665 

The  clergy  had  supported  the  nobles  in  the  insurrection. 
The  Russian  government  punished  them  by  suppressing  most 
of  the  monasteries  and  confiscating  their  lands  and  by  sub- 
jecting the  priests  to  political  supervision. 

A  process  of  Russification  was  now  vigorously  pursued.  A  policy 
The  Russian  language  was  prescribed  for  the  correspondence    _      ^^^^  ^^' 
of  the  ofiicials  and  the  lectures  of  the  university  professors, 
and  the  use  of  Polish  was   forbidden  in  churches,  schools, 
theaters,  newspapers,  in  business  signs,  in  fact,  everywhere. 

The  consequences  of  the  Polish  insurrection  of  1863  were 

felt  in  Russia  as   well.       Those  who  desired   a  reversal   of 

the  Emperor's  previous  liberal  policies  and  a  return  to  the 

old  methods   and   conditions    were   greatly   encouraged   and 

strengthened.     Not   that   the   Emperor   at   once   abandoned 

his  liberal  policy.      The  great  measures  concerning  the  ad-  Effect  of 

ministrative   and    judicial   systems,   already   described,   were  .  ,. 

•^  J  ■>  J  insurrection 

pronmlgated  even  after  this.  But  Alexander  II,  always  ^pon  Alex- 
vacillating,  was  troubled  by  these  events.  Reaction  was  ander  II. 
hastened  by  two  attempts  to  assassinate  him,  one  in  1866, 
and  the  other  in  1867.  The  Tsar,  hitherto  liberal,  became 
reactionary.  The  execution  of  the  reform  measures  de- 
scribed above  was  entrusted,  as  has  been  said,  to  those  who 
were  anxious  to  limit  them,  or  completely  to  destroy  them, 
and  thus  it  came  about  that  they  were  only  partially  applied, 
were  robbed  of  some  of  their  essential  features.  Universities 
again  felt  the  weight  of  bureaucratic  hostility.  The  achieve- 
ments of  the  reform  era  were  rapidly  being  undone,  and 
Russia  was  slipping  back  into  the  old  familiar  ways.  This 
reaction  aroused  intense  discontent  and  engendered  a  move- 
ment which  threatened  the  very  existence  of  the  monarchy 
itself,  namely.  Nihilism. 

The  more  liberal-minded  Russians   had   followed   the   re-  Alexander's 
forming  policy  of  the  early  years  of  Alexander's  reign  with  ^°  ^^^ 
great  enthusiasm,  and  after  the  issuance  of  the  decree  estab-  trogressive. 
lishing  the   zemstvos  they  hoped  that   the  Tsar  would   ad- 
vance  further   along  the   same   path   and  would   crown   his 


666       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

work  with  a  constitution,  and  with  real  parliamentary  in- 
stitutions for  the  whole  Empire.    Their  optimism  was  doomed 
to  speedy  extinction.      When  the  members  of  the  zemstvos 
begged  the  Tsar  to  grant  a  representative  constitution  he 
rebuked   tliem   summarily   for  mixing   in   affairs   not   theirs. 
Shortly,  the  zemstvos  were  told  that  they  were  not  political 
bodies,  but  merely  business  organizations,  designed  to  attend 
to  the  economic  interests  of  their  districts.     They  were  for- 
bidden to  express  political  views.      They  were  to  be  merely 
administrative  organs,  subject  to  the  officials  of  the  central 
government. 
Widespread        The  retrogressive  policy  of  the  later  years  of  Alexander 
disillusion-    H  created  a  widespread  and  bitter  sense  of  disappointment 
™^^  ■  and  deception,  and  resulted  in  the  rise  of  an  opposition  to  the 

existing  form  of  government.  This  feeling  has  passed 
through  several  phases,  but  has  constantly  become  stronger. 
The  first  phase  was  the  most  pessimistic.  The  Russians  were 
thrown  in  upon  themselves  once  more,  there  being  no  room 
in  the  Russian  state  for  liberal  action.  Reading  the  works 
of  the  more  radical  philosophers  and  scientists  of  western 
Europe,  and  reflecting  upon  the  foundations  of  their  own 
national  institutions  and  conditions,  the  "  intellectuals,"  as 
these  men  were  called,  became  most  destructive  critics,  and 
were  called  Nihilists. 
Hise  of  "  Tlie  fundamental  principle  of  Nihilism,"  says  Stepniak, 

Nihilism.  «  ^^s  absolute  individualism.  It  was  the  negation,  in  the 
name  of  individual  liberty,  of  all  the  obligations  imposed 
upon  the  individual  by  society,  by  family  life,  and  by  re- 
ligion." Turgenieff  defined  a  Nihilist  as  a  "  man  who  sub- 
mits to  no  authority,  who  accepts  not  a  single  principle  upon 
faith  merely,  however  high  such  a  principle  may  stand  in 
the  eyes  of  men."  The  Nihilists  were  extreme  individualists 
who  tested  every  human  institution  and  custom  by  reason. 
As  few  Russian  institutions  could  meet  such  a  test,  the  Nihil- 
ists condemned  them  all.  Theirs  was  an  attitude,  first  of  in- 
tellectual challenge,  then  of  revolt  against  the  whole  estab- 


THE  NIHILIST  PROPAGANDA  667 

lished  order.     They  did  not  properly  form  a  party  of  action,  Persecution 

but  their  reckless  criticism  of  government,  religion,  marriage,  ^5.  *5^.^^ 

1       •  •       Nihilists, 
ethics  brought  down  upon  them  the  wrath  of  the  authorities. 

Alarmed,  they  fled  to  other  countries.  The  term  Nihilist, 
as  a  term  of  opprobrium,  has  since  been  applied  by  the  con- 
servatives to  all  shades  and  kinds  of  reformers,  most  in- 
accurately. 

Forced  to  live  abroad,  mainly  in  France  and  Switzer- 
land, the  refugees  came  in  contact  with  other  advanced 
schools  of  thought.  One  of  these  was  represented  by 
Bakounine,  a  Siberian  exile,  who  had  escaped  and  was  living  Bakounine. 
in  London.  Bakounine  was  an  anarchist  who  advocated 
the  immediate  destruction  of  all  existing  institutions,  gov- 
ernments, churches,  the  family,  private  property,  codes  of 
law,  in  the  interests  of  human  freedom,  "  in  order  that,"  as 
he  said  later,  "  all  these  millions  of  poor  human  beings  who 
are  cheated,  enslaved,  overworked,  and  exploited  . 
may  henceforth  and  forever  breathe  in  absolute  freedom." 
Shortly,  Socialism  was  grafted  upon  this  hatred  of  all  es- 
tablished institutions,  this  anarchy  of  Bakounine.  In  the. 
place  of  the  existing  society,  which  must  be  swept  away,  a 
new  society  was  to  be  erected,  based  on  socialistic  principles. 
Thus  the  movement  entered  upon  a  new  phase.  It  ceased  to 
be  merely  critical  and  destructive.  It  became  constructive 
as  well,  in  short,  a  political  party  with  a  positive  programme, 
a  party  very  small  but  resolute  and  reckless,  willing  to  resort 
to  any  means  to  acliieve  its  aims. 

This  party  now  determined  to  institute  an  educational  Nihilist 
campaign  in  Russia,  realizing  that  nothing  could  be  done  P'^oP^S^^^ 
unless  the  millions  of  peasants  were  shaken  out  of  their 
stolid  acquiescence  in  the  prevalent  order  which  weighed  so 
heavily  upon  them.  This  extraordinary  movement,  called 
"  going  in  among  the  people,"  became  very  active  after 
1870.  Young  men  and  women,  all  belonging  to  the  educated 
class,  and  frequently  to  noble  families,  became  day  laborers 
and  peasants  in  order  to  mingle  with  the  people,  to  arouse 


668       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

them  to  action,  "  to  found,"  as  one  of  their  documents  said, 
*'  on  the  ruins  of  the  present  social  organization  the  empire 
of  the  working  chisses."  They  showed  the  self-sacrifice,  the 
heroism  of  the  missionary  laboring  under  the  most  discourag- 
ing conditions.  A  typical  case  was  that  of  Sophie  Bardine, 
arrested  for  discussing  a  socialist  pamphlet  before  a  group 
of  workmen.  She  had  for  several  months  been  employed  in  a 
spinning  factory,  working  fifteen  hours  a  day,  and  sharing 
all  the  hardships  of  the  other  women — all  this  that  she  might 
get  the  chance  to  preach  to  them  the  new  ideas.  Our  aim, 
she  explained  later  in  court,  "  was  to  arouse  in  the  conscience 
of  the  people  the  ideal  of  a  better  organization,  one  more  con- 
formable to  justice;  to  point  out  the  vices  of  the  present 
organization  in  order  to  prevent  the  return  of  the  same 
errors."  It  is  estimated  that,  between  1872  and  1878,  be- 
tween two  and  three  thousand  such  missionaries  were  active 
in  this  propaganda.  Their  efforts,  however,  were  not  re- 
warded with  success.  The  peasantry  remained  stolid,  if  not 
contented.  Moreover,  this  campaign  of  education  and  per- 
suasion was  broken  up  wherever  possible  by  the  ubiquitous 
and  lawless  police.  Many  were  imprisoned  or  exiled  to 
Siberia. 
A  policy  of  A  pacific  propaganda  being  impossible,  one  of  violence 
terrorism,  seemed  to  the  more  energetic  spirits  the  only  alternative. 
As  the  Government  held  the  people  in  a  subjection  unworthy 
of  human  beings,  as  it  employed  all  its  engines  of  power 
against  every  one  who  demanded  reform  of  any  kind,  as,  in 
short,  it  ruled  by  terror,  these  reformers  resolved  to  fight  it 
with  terror  as  the  only  method  possible.  The  "  Terrorists  " 
were  not  bloodthirsty  or  cruel  by  nature.  They  simply 
believed  that  no  progress  whatever  could  be  made  in  raising 
Russia  from  her  misery  except  by  getting  rid  of  the  more 
unscrupulous  officials.  They  perfected  their  organization 
and  entered  upon  a  period  of  violence.  Numerous  attempts, 
often  successful,  were  made  to  assassinate  the  high  officials, 
chiefs   of  police  and   others   who   had   rendered   themselves 


ATTACKS  UPON  THE  TSAR  669 

particularly    odious.     In    turn    many    of   the   revolutionists 
were   executed. 

All   this   redoubled   the   activity   of  the   authorities,   par-  Activity  of 
ticularly   of  the  dreaded  Third  Section  of  the  police.      In  *^^  police, 
the  course  of  a  single  winter,  18T8-9,  it  is  said  that  nearly 
2,000  arrests  were  made  in  St.  Petersburg  alone.      Suspected 
persons  were  not  allowed  witnesses,  and  were  often  summarily 
executed.     Thousands    Avere   arrested    and    sent    to    Siberia 
without  trial,  by  simple  administrative  decrees.     Finally  the  Attempts 
terrorists  determined  to  kill  the  Tsar  as  the  only  way  of  ^P^*^  *^^ 
overthrowing  the  whole  hated  arbitrary  and  oppressive  sys-  ... 
tern.      Several  attempts  were  made.     In  April  1879  a  school- 
master,  Solovief,  fired  five   shots   at  the  Emperor,  none  of 
which  took  effect.     In  December  of  the  same  year  a  train 
on  wliicli  he  was  supposed  to  be  returning  from  the  Crimea 
was  wrecked,  just  as  it  reached  Moscow,  by  a  mine  placed 
between  the  rails.     Alexander  escaped  only  because  he  had 
reached  the  capital  secretly  on  an  earlier  train.     The  next 
attempt   (February   1880)   was  to  kill  him  while  at  dinner 
in  the  Winter  Palace  in  St.  Petersburg.      Dynamite  was  ex- 
ploded, ten  soldiers  were  killed  and  fifty-three  wounded  in 
the  guardroom  directly  overhead,  and  the  floor  of  the  dining 
room  was  torn  up.     The  Tsar  narrowly  escaped  because  he 
did  not  go  to  dinner  at  the  usual  hour. 

St.   Petersburg  was  by  this   time  thoroughly   terrorized.  Alexander 
Alexander    now    appointed    Loris    Melikoff   practically    die-  H  ^^^ 
tator.     Melikoff  sought  to  inaugurate  a  milder  regime.     He    "V.!    « 
released  hundreds  of  prisoners,  and  in  many  cases  commuted 
the  death  sentence.     He  urged  the  Tsar  to  grant  the  people 
some  share  in  the  government,  believing  that  this  would  kill 
the  Nihilist   movement,   which  was   a   violent   expression   of 
the  discontent  of  the  nation  with  the  abuses  of  an  arbitrary 
and  lawless  system  of  government.     He  urged  that  this  could 
be  done  without  weakening  the  principle  of  autocracy,  and 
that  thus  Alexander  would  win  back  the  popularity  he  had 
enjoyed  during  his  early  reforming  years.     After  much  hes- 


670       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  ^Y1TU  JAPAN 

itation  and  mental  perturbation  the  Tsar  ordered,  March  13, 

1881,  MclikofF's  scheme  to  be  published  in  the  official  journal. 

Assassina-      But  on  that  same  afternoon,  as  he  was   returning  from  a 

tion  of  Alex-  jj^yg^    escorted   by    Cossacks,    a   bomb   was    thrown    at    his 
ander  II.  ... 

carnage.     The  carriage  was  wrecked,  and  many  of  his  escorts 

were  injured.     Alexander  escaped   as  by   a   miracle,  but   a 

second  bomb   exploded   near  him    as   he   was   going   to    aid 

the  injured.     He  was  horribly  mangled,  and  died  within  an 

hour.     Thus  perished  the  Tsar  Liberator.     At  the  same  time 

the  hopes  of  the  liberals  perished  also.     This  act  of  supreme 

violence    did    not    intimidate   the    successor    to    the    throne, 

Alexander     HI,     whose     entire     reign     was     one     of     stern 

repression. 


Alexander 

III, 

1845-1894. 


Rigorous 
policy  of 
reaction. 


Influence 
Pobyedo- 
nostseff. 


of 


THE  REIGN  OF  ALEXANDER  III 

The  man  who  now  ascended  the  throne  of  Russia  was  in 
the  full  flush  of  magnificent  manhood.  Alexander  III,  son 
of  Alexander  II,  was  thirty-six  years  of  age,  and  of  power- 
ful physique.  His  education  had  been  chiefly  military.  He 
was  a  man  of  firm  and  resolute  rather  than  large  or  active 
mind.  He  was  profoundly  religious,  and  had  a  deep  sense 
of  his  responsibility. 

It  shortly  became  clear  that  he  possessed  a  strong,  inflex- 
ible character,  that  he  was  a  thorough  believer  in  absolutism, 
and  was  determined  to  maintain  it  undiminished.  His  most 
influential  adviser  was  his  former  tutor,  Pobyedonostseff",  later 
for  many  years  Procurator  of  the  Holy  Synod,  a  man 
who  abhorred  the  liberal  ideas  of  western  Europe,  and  who 
insisted  that  Russia  must  preserve  her  own  native  institutions 
untainted,  must  follow  without  deviation  her  own  historic 
tendency,  which  he  conceived  in  a  strictly  nationalistic  sense. 
The  orthodoxy  of  the  Greek  Church,  the  absolutism  of  the 
monarch,  were  the  fundamental  tenets  of  his  belief, — ^no 
coquetting  with  western  ideas  of  representative  government 
and  religious  and  intellectual  freedom.  The  opinions  of  this 
man  are  historically  important  because  he  was   the  power 


ABSOLUTISM  OF  ALEXANDER  III  671 

behind  the  throne  during  all  of  Alexander  Ill's  reign,  and 
during  the  first  ten  years  of  his  successor's,  the  present  Em- 
peror's. Of  those  opinions  two,  significant  and  characteris- 
tic, may  be  quoted,  the  one  concerning  parliamentary  insti- 
tutions, the  other  concerning  the  press,  supposed,  in  western 
Europe,  to  be  two  of  the  most  powerful  agencies  of  progress. 
"  Parliament  is  an  institution  serving  for  the  satisfaction 
of  personal  ambition,  vanity,  and  self-interest  of  the  members.  Opposition 
The  institution  of  Parliament  is,  indeed,  one  of  the  greatest  *«  *^^  ^^^^^ 
illustrations  of  human  delusion.  .  .  .  On  the  pediment  j.  „ 
of  this  edifice  is  inscribed,  '  All  for  the  public  good.'  This 
is  no  more  than  a  lying  formula ;  Parliamentarism  is  the 
triumph  of  egoism — its  highest  expression."  "  From  the 
day  that  man  first  fell,  falsehood  has  ruled  the  world,  ruled 
it  in  human  speech,  in  the  practical  business  of  life,  in  all  its 
relations  and  institutions.  But  never  did  the  Father  of  Lies 
spin  such  webs  of  falsehood  of  every  kind  as  in  this  restless 
age.  .  .  .  The  press  is  one  of  the  falsest  institutions 
of  our  time."  ^ 

Under  the  influence  of  such  an  adviser,  and  under  the 
sway  of  his  own  instincts  and  his  indignation  at  the  insolent 
demand  of  the  Nihilists  that  the  murderers  of  his  father 
be  not  punished  as  they  were  merely  "  executors  of  a  hard 
civic  duty  " ;  influenced,  too,  no  doubt,  by  the  general  horror 
which  that  event  inspired,  and  the  warm  evidences  of  loyalty 
which  it  called  forth,  Alexander  assumed  an  attitude  of 
defiant  hostility  to  innovators  and  liberals.  His  reign,  which 
lasted  from  1881  to  1894,  was  one  of  reversion  to  the  older 
ideals  of  government  and  of  unqualified  absolutism. 

The  terrorists  were  hunted  down,  and  their  attempts  prac-  The 
tically  ceased.     The  press  was  thoroughly  gagged,  university  ^'^^o^^s  s 
professors    and    students    were   watched,    suspended,    exiled,  ^o^^^ 
as  the  case  might  be.     The  reforms   of  Alexander  II  were 
in  part  undone,  the  zemstvos  particularly  being  more  and 
more  restricted,  and  the  secret  police,  the  terrible  Third  Sec- 

^  Pobyedonostseff,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  Statesman,  35,  62. 


612       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

tion,  being  greatly  augmented.     Liberals  gave  up  all  hope 

of  any  improvement  during  this  reign,  and  waited  for  better 

days. 

Many  of  the  subjects  of  the  Emperor  felt  the  hand  of 

Persecution    the    oppressor   with    excessive   severity.     Under   him   began 

°  the  persecutions   of  the  Jews,  which  have  been  so   dark   a 

Jews.  J-  c  •        1  • 

feature  of  recent  Russian  history.     The  chief  home  of  the 

Jews  in  the  modern  world  is  Russia.  Out  of  about  eight  and 
a  half  million  Jews  in  Europe,  over  five  million  live  in 
that  country.  The  Russian  Jews  had  long  been  restricted  to 
Poland  and  to  the  contiguous  provinces  of  Lithuania,  called 
the  Jewish  Territory,  formerly  a  part  of  Poland.  The  Tsar, 
bigoted,  and  believing  in  a  policy  of  Russification  of  all 
the  varied  elements  and  races  of  the  Empire,  looked 
with  disfavor  upon  a  people  which  held  fast  its  own  re- 
ligion and  spoke  its  own  language  and  maintained  its  own 
customs.  Under  Alexander  II  the  restrictions  upon  Jewish 
residence  had  not  been  rigorously  enforced,  and  many  were 
living  outside  the  Jewish  Territory.  These  were  now  ordered 
back,  although  suffering  and  hardship  were  the  inevitable 
result.  Anti-Jewish  riots  broke  out  in  many  places,  costing 
many  lives.  The  Government  gave  but  slight  protection; 
indeed,  in  many  cases  the  officials  appeared  to  encourage 
the  outbreaks,  so  popular  was  Jew-baiting.  To  keep  them 
out  of  the  liberal  professions  decrees  were  issued  limiting 
the  number  of  Jews  who  might  attend  the  secondary  schools 
and  universities — to  from  three  to  ten  per  cent,  of  the 
total  enrollment  according  to  the  region,  even  though  in 
some  of  these  districts  they  formed  a  third  or  a  half  of 
the  population.  Utterly  miserable  and  insecure,  tens  of 
Jewish  thousands  left  the  country.     The  great  Jewish  emigration 

emigration,    to   the  United  States   dates   from  this   time. 

Elsewhere,  too,  in  the  Baltic  provinces,  where  the  dominant 
element  was  of  German  origin,  and  in  Finland,  and  particu- 
larly in  Poland,  the  policy  of  Russification  was  \'igorously 
applied.     Alexander  was   offended  by   the   sight  within  his 


PROGRESS  UNDER  ALEXANDER  III  673 

Empire  of  religions,  races,  and  languages  not  his  own,  and  he 
steadily  endeavored  to  suppress  the  variations.  Thus  by 
the  close  of  his  reign  the  attempt  to  force  alien  peoples  to 
become  thoroughly  Russian  was  in  process  of  execution.  It 
was  both  political  and  religious.  Apparently  meeting  with 
a  large  measure  of  success,  its  permanence  or  profundity 
was  not  clear.  Widespread,  intense,  though  silent,  dis- 
affection was  aroused,  which  would  surely  express  itself 
if  the  Government  should  ever  find  itself  in  difficulties. 
This  policy  sowed  abundant  seeds  of  trouble  for  the 
future. 

While  the  policy  of  Alexander  III  was  thus  opposed  to  Progressive 

the   intellectual   and   moral    forces   of   liberalism,    and   while    f^  "^^^ 

...  the  reig^n 

it  was  harshly  oppressive  to  the  religious  dissenters  and  ^^  Alex- 
subject  nationalities  of  alien  race,  in  other  directions  it  v/as  ander  III. 
progressive.  The  Tsar  was  sincerely  interested  in  the 
material  advancement  of  his  people,  and  won  the  title  of 
the  Peasants'  Emperor.  He  abolished  the  poll  tax,  which 
has  been  called  "  the  last  relic  of  serfdom  "  (January  1884). 
He  partially  canceled  the  dues  still  owed  by  the  peasants 
in  compensation  for  lands  acquired  at  the  time  of  the  emanci- 
pation. He  sought  to  encourage  the  peasants  to  emigrate 
from  congested  districts  to  more  sparsely  populated  regions, 
for  the  question  of  subsistence  was  then,  as  it  still  is,  a 
serious  problem  in  Russia.  The  lands  allotted  the  peasants 
at  the  time  of  their  liberation  were  inadequate  then,  and 
have  become  more  inadequate  since,  owing  to  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  population.  In  1815  the  population  was 
about  forty-five  million,  in  1867  over  eighty-two,  in  1885  over 
one  hundred  and  eight  millions.  This  growth  has  been  re- 
markable. In  a  land  with  endless  agricultural  stretches, 
widespread  and  terrible  famines  have  frequently  occurred. 

The  most  important  feature  of  Alexander's  reign  was  the  The 

industrial  revolution  which  began  then,  and  has  been  carried  i^^^^stna 

.111         j>  revolution, 

much  further  under  his  successor.  Russia  had  been  for  cen- 
turies an  agricultural  country  whose  agriculture,  moreover. 


674       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


Sergius  de 
Witte. 
Minister  of 
Finance. 


Witte's 

industrial 

policy. 


was  of  the  primitive  type.  Whatever  industries  existed  were 
mainly  of  the  household  kind.  Russia  was  one  of  the  poorest 
countries  in  the  world,  her  immense  resources  being  undevel- 
oped. Under  the  system  of  protection  adopted  by  Alexander 
II,  and  continued  and  increased  by  Alexander  III,  industries 
of  a  modern  kind  began  to  grow  up.  A  tremendous  impetus 
was  given  to  this  development  by  the  appointment  in  1892 
as  Minister  of  Finance  and  Commerce  of  Sergius  de  Witte, 
one  of  the  most  salient  personalities  in  recent  Russian  his- 
tory. Witte  believed  that  Russia,  the  largest  and  most 
populous  country  in  Europe,  a  world  in  itself,  ought  to  be 
self-sufficient,  that  as  long  as  it  remained  chiefly  agricultural 
it  would  be  tributary  to  the  industrial  nations  for  manufac- 
tured articles,  that  it  had  abundant  resources,  in  raw  material 
and  in  labor,  to  enable  it  to  supply  its  own  needs  if  they 
were  but  developed,  that  a  diversified  industrial  life  would 
have  the  further  advantage  that  it  would  draw  laborers  from 
the  soil  already  overtaxed,  and  would  thus  render  the  agra- 
rian problem  less  acute.  To  effect  this  economic  transforma- 
tion, believing  thoroughly  in  a  protective  tariff,  he  advised 
that  duties  be  raised  and  applied  on  a  wider  scale.  But 
that  the  process  of  building  up  the  nation's  industries  might 
be  rapid,  it  was  essential  that  a  large  amount  of  capital 
should  be  invested  at  once  in  the  various  industries,  and  this 
capital  Russia  did  not  possess.  One  of  the  cardinal  features 
of  Witte's  policy  was  to  induce  foreign  capitalists  to  invest 
in  Russian  factories  and  mines.  He  was  eminently  success- 
ful in  bringing  this  about  by  showing  them  that  they  would 
have  the  Russian  market  by  reason  of  the  protective  system, 
and  by  promising,  in  many  cases,  large  orders  from  the 
Government  for  their  products.  Immense  amounts  of  for- 
eign capital  poured  in,  and  Russia  advanced  industrially  in 
the  closing  decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  with  great  swift- 
ness. But  that  these  industi'ies  might  flourish,  the  markets 
must  be  rendered  more  accessible  so  that  customers  could 
be   reached.     Russia's    greatest   lack    was    good   means    of 


ECONOMIC  EVOLUTION  OF  RUSSIA  675 

communication.      She   now   undertook   to    supply   tliis    want  Extensive 

by  extensive  railway  building.      For  some  years  before  M.  de  ^^^^^Iway 

coiist«riiC" 
Witte  assumed  office,  Russia  was  building  less  than  400  miles  ,. 

of  railway  a  year ;  from  that  time  on  for  the  rest  of  the 
decade,  she  built  nearly  1,400  miles  a  year.  The  most  stu- 
pendous of  these  undertakings  was  that  of  a  trunk  line 
connecting  Europe  with  the  Pacific  Ocean,  the  great  Trans- 
Siberian  railroad.  For  this  Russia  borrowed  vast  sums  of 
money  in  western  Europe,  principally  in  France.  Begun  in 
1891,  the  road  was  formally  opened  in  1902.  It  has  re- 
duced the  time  and  cost  of  transportation  to  the  East  about 
one-half.  In  1909  Russia  possessed  over  41,000  miles  of 
railway,  over  28,000  of  which  were  owned  and  operated  by 
the  Government. 

This  tremendous  change  in  the  economic  life  of  the  Empire  Rise  of 
was  destined  to  have  momentous  consequences,  some  of  which  l3.Dor 
were  quickly  apparent.  With  the  introduction  of  modern 
industry  on  a  large  scale  came  the  rise  of  a  large  laboring 
class  and  of  labor  problems  of  the  kind  with  whicli  western 
Europe  had  long  been  familiar.  An  industrial  proletariat 
has  sprung  up  in  Russia  as  elsewhere,  a  new  source  of  dis- 
content. Cities  have  grown  rapidly,  owing  to  the  large 
number  of  workmen  pouring  into  them.  Two  of  these,  Mos- 
cow and  St.  Petersburg,  have  over  a  million  each.  In  the 
large  factory  towns  the  revolutionists  have  a  new  field  of 
activity  which  can  be  more  easily  worked  than  the  country 
districts.  Here  socialistic  theories  have  spread  rapidly  as 
among  the  working  people  of  the  other  countries  of  Europe. 

All    this,   too,    has    created    a    considerable   body    of    rich  Rise  of  a 

"  industrials  "  of  the  middle  class,  of  capitalists,  in  short,  a  "^^ 

1}  our^rcoisic 
bourgeoisie  which   would  not  permanently  be   content   with 

entire  exclusion  from  political  power  or  with  obsolete,  nar- 
row, illiberal  forms  of  government.  Thus  the  political  con- 
dition of  to-day  has  been  rendered  more  complex  by  the 
addition  of  two  new  elements  to  the  army  of  discontent. 
Looked  at  in  this  light,  the  reign  of  Alexander  III  is  seen 


676       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

to  be,  not  stagnant,  but  highly  formative.     Alexander  was 

undermining  his  most  cherished  political  principle  by  the  new 

forces  which  he  was  liberating,  and  which  in  time  were  bound 

to  spring  the  old  iron  framework  of  Russian  life  asunder. 

This  fact  partly  explains  the  great  unpopularity  of  Witte 

The  system    among  the  traditional  ruling  classes  of  Russia.      A  system 

0    pnvi  ege  i-^stlng   on   privilege   and   tradition   cannot   safely   innovate 
menaced.  .       ,      ^.         .^  .  . 

even  ni  the  direction  of  extracting  oil  and  iron  from  the  soil, 

and  spinning  cotton  and  weaving  wool.  That  the  old  system 
was  being  undermined  was  not,  however,  apparent,  and  might 
not  have  been  for  many  years  had  not  Russia,  ten  years  after 
Alexander's  death,  become  Involved  in  a  disastrous  and  humil- 
iating war  with  Japan. 

THE  REIGN  OF  NICHOLAS  II 

Accession  of  Alexander  III  died  In  1894,  and  was  succeeded  by  his 
Nicholas  II.  son,  Nicholas  II,  then  twenty-six  years  of  age.  The  hope 
was  general  that  a  milder  regime  might  now  be  introduced. 
This,  however,  was  not  to  be.  No  change  of  Importance 
was  made  in  the  Emperor's  councilors.  Pobyedonostseff,  the 
very  Incarnation  of  narrow-minded,  stiff-necked  despotism, 
remained  the  power  behind  the  throne.  For  ten  years  the 
young  Tsar  pursued  the  policy  of  his  father  with  scarcely 
a  variation  save  In  the  direction  of  greater  severity.  Nich- 
olas early  announced  his  Intention  to  "  protect  the  principle 
of  autocracy  as  firmly  and  unswervingly  as  did  my  late  and 
never-to-be-forgotten  father."  A  suggestion  of  one  of  the 
zemstvos  that  representative  institutions  might  be  granted 
was    declared    "  a    senseless    dream,"    and    the    zemstvo    was 

^    ^.  severely  reprimanded.     The  government  of  Russia  grew  more 

Continuance  .  . 

of  auto-         oppressive,    rather   than    less,    as    the    century    wore    to    Its 

cratic  gov-    close.     It  was  not  a  government  of  law  but  one  of  arbitrary 

ernmen  .        power.      Its  main  Instruments  were  a  numerous  and  corrupt 

bureaucracy  or  body  of  state  officials  who  were  not,  in  the 

slightest  degree,  responsible  to  the  people,  and  a  ruthless, 


CONDITION  OF  THE  PEASANTRY  677 

active  police.  This  being  the  system,  an  eminent  Russian 
scholar,  Professor  VinogradofF,  could  say  in  England  in 
1902,  "  Nobody'  is  secure  against  search,  arrest,  imprison- 
ment and  relegation  to  the  remote  parts  of  the  Empire. 
From  political  supervision  the  solicitude  of  the  authorities 
has  spread  to  interferences  with  all  kinds  of  private  affairs. 
Such  is  the  legal  protection  we  are  now  enjoying 
in  Russia."  And  again,  "  Such  a  government  is  not  a 
fitting  patron  of  law  and  justice.  What  it  enforces  is 
obedience  to  order,  not  to  law,  and  its  contempt  of  law  Is 
exemplified  in  every  way."  ^  Under  such  a  system,  men 
could  be  terrorized  into  silence,  they  could  not  be  made 
contented.  Disaffection,  driven  into  subterranean  channels, 
only  increased,  biding  its  time  for  explosion.  The  immense  Increasing 
additions  to  the  public  debt  and  expenditure,  occasioned  disaflfection. 
by  the  extensive  railroad  building  and  the  support  of  army 
and  navy,  involved  heavier  taxation  which  fell  mainly  on 
the  poor,  the  peasantry,  reducing  them  to  destitution  and 
despair.  Of  this  the  same  Russian  authority  said,  speak- 
ing of  the  appalling  conditions,  "  In  most  cases  the  number 
of  cattle  and  horses  owned  by  the  peasantry  is  decreasing. 
In  some  districts  of  the  province  of  Samara,  which  counts 
among  the  granaries  of  Russia,  there  have  been  years  when 
one-third,  and  even  one-half  of  the  population  have  been 
turned  into  mendicants.  When  the  tax  gatherer  turns  away 
in  despair  from  such,  wretched  people  he  fastens  the  more  Wretched 
on   those   who   still   have   something   left.     It   may   be    said  condition 

without  exaggeration  that  for  the  majority  of  the  Russian 

.  ....  peasantry, 

peasantry  the  primary  object  in  life  is  to  earn  enough  to 

pay  the  taxes,  everything  else  is  accident.  The  wonder  is 
not  at  the  lack  of  enterprise  and  thrift,  but  at  the  endurance 
which  enables  men  to  toil  along  in  the  face  of  such  con- 
ditions." ^  The  same  witness  quotes  a  Russian  magistrate 
as  saying  that  "  there  is  no  indignity  which,  in  the  beginning 

*  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the  Nineteenth  Century,  edited  by  F.  A. 
Kirkpatrick,  266-267. 
'  Ibid.,  259. 


678       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

of  the  twentieth  century,  may  not  be  inflicted  on  a  Russian 

peasant." 

Persecution        The  professional  and  educated  man  was  in   a   condition 

of  the  "  in-  ahnost  as  intolerable.     If  a  professor  in  a  university,  he  was 
tellectuals."  .  .  *^ 

watched  by  the  police,  and  was  likely  to  be  removed  at  any 

moment  as  was  Professor  Milyoukov,  an  historian  of  dis- 
tinguished attainments,  for  no  other  reason  than  "  generally 
noxious  tendencies."  If  an  editor,  his  position  was  even 
more  precarious,  unless  he  was  utterly  servile  to  the  author- 
ities. It  was  a  suffocating  atmosphere  for  any  man  of  the 
slightest  intellectual  independence,  living  in  the  ideas  of  the 
present  age.  The  censorship  grew  more  and  more  rigorous, 
and  included  such  books  as  Green's  History  of  England,  and 
Bryce's  American  Commonwealth.  Arbitrary  arrests  of  all 
kinds  increased  from  year  to  year  as  the  difficulty  of  thor- 
oughly bottling  up  Russia  increased.  Students  were  the 
objects  of  special  police  care,  as  it  was  the  young  and  ardent 
and  educated  who  were  most  indignant  at  this  senseless 
despotism.  Many  of  them  disappeared,  in  one  year  as  many 
as  a  fifth  of  those  in  the  University  of  Moscow,  probably  sent 
to  Siberia  or  to  prisons  in  Europe. 

A  government  of  this  kind  was  not  likely  to  err  from 
Attack  upon  excess  of  sympathy  with  the  subject  nationalities,  such  as 
the  Finns,  the  Poles  and  the  Finns.  In  Finland,  indeed,  its  arbitrary 
course  attained  its  climax.  Finland  had  been  acquired  by 
Russia  in  1809,  but  on  liberal  terms.  It  was  not  incor- 
porated in  Russia,  but  continued  a  Grand  Duchy,  with  the 
Emperor  of  Russia  as  simply  Grand  Duke.  It  had  its  own 
Parliament,  its  Fundamental  Laws  or  constitution,  to  which 
the  Grand  Duke  swore  fidelity.  These  Fundamental  Laws 
could  not  be  altered  or  explained  or  repealed  except  with  the 
consent  of  the  Diet  and  the  Grand  Duke.  Finland  was  a 
constitutional  state,  governing  itself,  connected  with  Russia 
in  the  person  of  its  sovereign.  It  had  its  own  army,  its  own 
currency  and  postal  S3^stem.  Under  this  liberal  regime  it 
prospered  greatly,  its  population  increasing  from  less  than 


RUSSIAN  POLICY  TOWARD  FINLAND        679 

a  million  to  nearly  three  million  by  the  close  of  the  century, 
and  was,  according  to  an  historian  of  Russia,  at  least  thirty 
years  in  advance  of  that  country  in  all  the  appliances  of 
material  civilization/  The  sight  of  this  country  enjoying 
a  constitution  of  its  own  and  a  separate  oi'ganization  was 
an  offense  to  the  men  controlling  Russia.  They  wished  to 
sweep  away  all  distinctions  between  the  various  parts  of 
the  Emperor's  dominions,  to  unify,  to  Russify.  The  attack 
upon  the  liberties  of  the  Finns  began  under  Alexander  III. 
It  was  carried  much  further  by  Nicholas  II,  who,  on  February 
15,  1899,  issued  an  imperial  manifesto  which  really  abro-  Abrogation 
gated  the  constitution  of  the  country.  The  Finnish  Diet  of  t^^ 
was  henceforth  to  legislate  only  concerning  matters  relating  constitution 
solely  to  Finland.  All  legislation  of  a  general  nature  affect- 
ing the  Empire  as  a  whole  was  to  be  enacted  in  the  ordinary 
way,  that  is,  by  the  Tsar,  who  also  said,  "  We  have  found 
it  necessary  to  reserve  to  Ourselves  the  ultimate  decision  as 
to  which  laws  come  within  the  scope  of  the  general  legisla- 
tion of  the  Empire."  This  practically  meant  that  Finland 
was  henceforth  to  be  ruled  like  Russia.  The  Finns  so  under- 
stood it.  The  following  Sunday  was  observed  as  a  day 
of  mourning.  An  immense  petition  was  drawn  up,  signed 
within  five  days  by  over  half  a  million  people.  The  Tsar 
refused  to  receive  it. 

The  process  of  enforced  Russification  was  continued. 
The  Finnish  army  was  virtually  incorporated  in  the  Russian. 
Finnish  soldiers,  who  had  hitherto  been  required  to  serve 
only  in  the  Grand  Duchy,  might  now  be  sent  to  serve 
anywhere.  Russian  officials  were  appointed  to  positions  in 
Finland  previously  filled  only  by  Finns.  Newspapers  were 
suppressed  or  suspended.  Finnish  nationality  was  being  in- 
tentionally crushed  out.  Intense  was  the  indignation  of  the 
Finns,  but  three  million  people  were  powerless  against  ])gs_ajj. 
the  autocrat  of  one  hundred  and  forty  million.  For  the  of  the 
moment  there  w^ere  no   signs   of  any  possible   relief.      Grim  Finns. 

^Skrine,  Expansion  of  Russia,  1815-1900,  p.  322. 


680       RUSSIA  TO  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

despair  seized  the  people.     Temporary  relief  was  to  come  as 

a  result  of  the  disastrous  defeat  of  Russia  in  the  war  with 

Japan  in  1904<-5,  a  landmark  in  contemporary  history. 

Rise  of  the        To  understand  recent  events  in  Russia  it  is  necessary  to 

ar     as  em  {.j,j^j,g  ^j-^g  course  of  that  war  whose  consequences  have  been 
Question,  ,  .      . 

profound    and    far-reaching,    and   to    show    the    significance 

of  that  conflict  we  must  interrupt  this  narrative  of  Russian 

history  in  order  to  give  an  account  of  the  recent  evolution 

of  Asia,  the  rise  of  the  so-called  Far  Eastern  Question,  and 

the  interaction  of  Occident  and  Orient  upon  each  other. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

THE  FAR  EAST 

ENGLAND,  FRANCE,  AND  RUSSIA  IN  ASIA 

EuEOPE  has  not  only  taken  possession  of  Africa,  but  she  England, 

has   taken  possession   of  lare-e  parts   of  Asia,   and   presses  ^*^°®'  *^ 
^.  &     x-  '  X-  Russia  in 

with  increasing  force  upon  the  remainder.  England  and  Asia. 
France  dominate  southern  Asia  by  their  control,  the  former 
of  India  and  Burma,  the  latter  of  a  large  part  of  Indo- 
China.  Russia,  on  the  other  hand,  dominates  the  north, 
from  the  Ural  Mountains  to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  As  far  as 
geographical  extent  is  concerned,  she  is  far  more  an  Asiatic 
power  than  a  European,  which,  indeed,  is  also  true  of 
England  and  of  France,  and  she  has  been  an  Asiatic  power 
much  longer  than  they,  for  as  early  as  1581  Cossacks  from 
the  Don  had  crossed  the  Urals  and  seized  a  town  called  Sibir. 
Pushing  onward  farther  and  farther  east,  and  meeting  no 
serious  obstacles,  the  population  being  small,  they  conquered 
most  of  northern  Asia  before  the  Pilgrims  came  to  America, 
and  in  1633  they  reached  the  Pacific.  To  this  country,  now 
Russian,  they  gave  the  name  Siberia,  applying  the  name  of 
the  first  region  conquered  to  the  whole.  In  1648  the  town 
of  Okhotsk  was  founded.  Thus  for  nearly  three  centuries 
Russia  has  been  a  great  Asiatic  state,  while  England  has  been 
a  power  in  India  for  only  half  that  time. 

It  was  not  until  the  nineteenth  century,  however,  that  Russian 
Russia  began  to  devote  serious  attention  to  Asia  as  a  field 
for  colonial  and  commercial  expansion.  Siberia  was  regarded 
merely  as  a  convenient  prison  to  which  to  send  her  disaffected 
or  criminal  citizens.  Events  in  Europe  have  caused  her  to 
concentrate  her  attention  more  and  more  upon  her  Asiatic 
development.  She  has  sought  there  what  she  had  long  been 
seeking  in  Europe,  but  without  avail,  because  of  the  oppo- 

681 


682  THE  FAR  EAST 

sition  she  encountered,  namely,  contact  with  the  ocean,  free 
outlets  to  the  world.     Russia's  coast  line,  either  in  Europe 

Hussia  or  Asia,  had  no  harbors  free  from  ice  the  year  round.      She 

seeks  access  j^^d  attempted  to  gain  this  contact  at  the  expense  of  Turkey, 
hoping  to  reach  the  Mediterranean,  but  she  had  not  suc- 
ceeded. She  made  no  progress  in  this  direction  in  the  nine- 
teenth century.  Blocked  decisively  by  the  Crimean  war,  and 
seeing  no  chance  in  Europe,  she  turned  to  seek  advantage  in 
the  East.  Her  coast  line  in  eastern  Siberia  was  very  far 
north,  with  the  result  tliat  its  harbors  were  icebound  more 
than  half  of  the  year.  She  sought  to  extend  that  line  south- 
ward. In  1858  she  acquired  from  China,  then  involved  in  a 
war  with  Great  Britain  and  France,  the  whole  northern  bank 
of  the  Amur,  and  two  yea,rs  later  she  acquired  from  China 
more  territory  farther  south,  which  became  the  Maritime 
Province,  and  at  the  southern  point  of  this  she  founded  as  a 
naval  base  Vladivostok,  which  means  the  Dominator  of  the 
East.     Here  her  development  in  eastern  Asia  stopped. 

Conquest  of       ^'^  another  direction,  Russian  advance  has  been  notable. 

Turkestan.  She  has  conquered  Turkestan,  a  vast  region  east  of  the 
Caspian  Sea,  and  this  conquest  has  brought  her  close  to 
India,  and  has  given  great  importance  to  Afghanistan  as  a 
buffer  between  them.  Turkestan  had  a  population  of  about 
10,000,000,  partly  nomadic,  partly  settled  in  famous  cities 
such  as  Samarkand,  Bokhara,  Tashkend.  The  nomads  fre- 
quently made  incursions  into  Siberia,  and  cut  off  the  com- 
munications of  Russia  with  her  eastern  possessions.  To 
secure  the  safety  of  Siberia  it  was  necessary  to  subdue  them. 
The  process  was  a  long  one  (184<5-1885),  and  at  time  exceed- 
ingly difficult,  but  was  in  the  end  entirely  successful,  and 
Russia  annexed  Turkestan,  proceeding  shortly  to  connect 
it  with  Europe  by  the  Trans-Caspian  railroad. 

CHINA 

China.  Between    Russian    Asia    on    the    north,    and    British    and 

French   Asia   on   the   south,   lies   the   oldest   empire    of   the 


THE  CIVILIZATION  OF  CHINA  683 

world,  China,  and  one  more  extensive  than  Europe  and 
probably  more  populous,  with  more  than  400,000,000  inhab- 
itants/ It  is  a  land  of  great  navigable  rivers,  of  vast 
agricultural  areas,  and  of  mines  rich  in  coal  and  metals, 
as  yet  largely  undeveloped.  The  Chinese  were  a  highly  The  civiliza- 
civilized  people  long  before  the  Europeans  were.  They  pre-  ]^  ° 
ceded  che  latter  by  centuries  in  the  use  of  the  compass, 
powder,  porcelain,  paper.  As  early  as  the  sixth  century 
of  our  era  they  knew  the  art  of  printing  from  movable  wooden 
blocks.  They  have  long  been  famous  for  their  work  in 
bronze,  in  wood,  in  lacquer,  for  the  marvels  of  their  silk 
manufacture.  As  a  people  laborious  and  intelligent,  they 
have  always  been  devoted  to  the  peaceful  pursuits  of  in- 
dustry, and  have  despised  the  arts  of  war.  Their  greatest 
national  hero  is  not  a  soldier  but  a  philosopher  and  moralist, 
Confucius.  Their  really  vital  religion  is  ancestor  worship, 
and  they  worship,  not  simply  the  souls  of  their  ancestors, 
but  their  ideas  and  customs  as  well.  Hence  the  most  salient 
feature  of  their  civilization,  its  immobility.  For  that  civili- 
zation, so  ancient,  and  in  some  respects  so  brilliant,  lacked  the 
very  element  that  gives  to  European  civilization  its  extraor- 
dinary interest,  namely,  its  restlessness,  its  eagerness,  its  buoy- 
ancy, its  daring,  its  constant  struggle  for  improvement,  its 
adaptability  to  the  new,  its  forwardness  of  view,  in  short,  its 
belief  in  progress.  The  one  emphasized  the  past,  the  other 
the  present  and  the  future.  The  history  of  the  former  was 
one  of  endless  repetition  from  generation  to  generation,  and 
from  century  to  century ;  the  history  of  the  latter  was  one  of 
evolution.  The  reverence  for  ancestral  ideas,  for  immemo- 
rial customs  as  the  perfection  of  wisdom,  rendered  the  Chinese 
hostile  to  all  innovations  in  the  realm  of  thought  or  in  the 
realm  of  action.     Foreigners  they  regarded  as  barbarians. 

'  Mr.  W.  W.  Rockhill,  late  minister  of  the  United  States  at  Peking, 
came  to  the  conclusion  in  1904,  after  careful  inquiries,  that  the  official 
Chinese  estimates  have  been  for  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  greatly  ex- 
aggerated and  that  the  number  of  inhabitants  does  not  much  exceed 

270,000,000. 


684) 


THE  FAR  EAST 


ment  of 
China 


Isolation 
of  China 


Their  Kingdom  they  called  the  Middle  Kingdom,  i.e.,  the 
center  of  the  world.  They  called  themselves  Celestials. 
The  govern-  Their  Emperor  was  the  "  Son  of  Heaven."  He  was,  in 
theory,  an  absolute  monarch.  He  was  represented  in  the 
eighteen  provinces  into  which  China  was  divided  by  Viceroys. 
The  office-holding  class,  called  by  foreigners  the  mandarins^ 
was  chosen  from  the  educated  by  an  elaborate  and  severe 
series  of  examinations  in  the  literature  and  learning  of  China. 
The  programme  of  studies  in  vogue  until  very  recently  was 
the  same  that  had  been  in  vogue  for  a  thousand  years.  The 
reigning  dynasty,  the  Manchu,  had  been  on  the  throne  since 
1644,  when  it  succeeded  in  overthrowing  the  former  or  Ming 
dynasty. 

China,  then,  had  always  lived  a  life  of  isolation,  despising 
the  outside  world.  Something  was  known  of  it  in  Europe, 
yet  remarkably  little.  Marco  Polo  in  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury brought  home  marvelous  accounts  which  were  one  of 
the  great  inspirations  of  the  age  of  geographical  discovery. 
Explorers  and,  later,  missionaries  and  merchants  sought  out 
the  fabulous  land.  At  times  they  even  received  some  favors 
from  the  more  enlightened  Emperors.  But,  speaking  broadly, 
the  connection  between  Europe  and  China  was  of  the  slight- 
est down  to  the  nineteenth  century.  Foreigners  were  per- 
mitted in  the  eighteenth  century  to  trade  in  one  Chinese 
port,  Canton,  but  even  there  only  under  vexatious  and  humi- 
liating conditions.  China  had  no  diplomatic  representatives 
in  any  foreign  country,  nor  were  any  foreign  ambassadors 
resident  in  Peking.  China  did  not  recognize  any  equality 
on  the  part  of  England,  France,  Spain,  or  any  other  country. 
"  There  is  only  one  sun  in  the  heavens,  and  there  is  only 
one  Emperor  on  earth,"  was  a  Chinese  saying.  Inhabiting 
a  country  larger  than  Europe,  with  every  variety  of  soil 
and  climate,  and  with  an  old  and  elaborate  civilization,  it 
is  not  surprising  that  the  Chinese  were  self-sufficient  and 
indifferent  to  the  outside  world.  They  even  forbade  for- 
eigners learning  the  Chinese  language. 


THE  OPIUM  WAR  685 

Obviously  a  policy  of  such  isolation  could  not  be  perma- 
nently maintained  in  the  modern  age,  and  as  the  nine- 
teenth century  progressed  it  was  gradually  shattered.  This 
isolation  began  to  be  broken  down  by  the  outside  world  as 
a  result  of  the  so-called  Opium  War  between  China  and  The  Opium 
Great  Britain.  Opium,  a  very  harmful  and  dangerous  drug,  War. 
is  made  from  a  certain  kind  of  poppy  that  is  grown  in 
India.  The  Chinese  government,  anxious  to  preserve  its 
people  from  the  effects  of  the  usage  of  this  drug,  forbade 
its  importation  in  1796.  Yet  the  trade,  though  declared 
illegal,  was  carried  on  by  smugglers  with  whom  corrupt 
Chinese  officials  connived  for  the  sake  of  gain.  This  illicit 
traffic  flourished  greatly.  Four  thousand  chests  were  im- 
ported into  China  in  1796,  thirty  thousand  in  1837.  Each 
chest  was  supposed  to  be  worth  from  six  to  twelve  hundred 
dollars.  The  profits  were  enormous.  The  trade  was  a 
source  of  great  income  to  British  India,  which  did  not  msh 
to  do  without  it. 

In  1837  the  Chinese  government  proposed  to  stop  this 
smuggling,  and  sent  a  Viceroy  of  great  energy,  Lin,  to  see 
that  it  was  done.  In  this  it  was  entirely  within  its  rights. 
Lin  seized  about  20,000  chests  of  opium  and  destroyed  them. 
Unfortunately,  by  his  later  arbitrary  and  arrogant  proceed- 
ings, he  put  himself  in  the  wrong.  Out  of  this  situation  arose 
the  Opium  War,  which  began  in  1840,  and  lasted  about  two 
years,  ending  in  the  victory  of  Great  Britain.  This  was  the 
first  war  between  China  and  a  European  power.  The  conse- 
quences, in  forcing  the  doors  of  China  wider  open  to  Euro- 
pean influence,  were  important.  By  the  Treaty  of  Nanking, 
1842,  she  was  forced  to  pay  a  large  war  indemnity,  in  part 
as  compensation  for  the  destroyed  opium ;  to  open  to  British  The  treaty 
trade  four  ports  in  addition  to  Canton,  namely,  Amoy,  P°"^* 
Foochow,  Ningpo,  and  Shanghai,  on  the  same  conditions 
as  those  established  for  Canton ;  and  to  cede  the  island  of 
Hong  Kong,  near  Canton,  to  England  outright.  Hong 
Kong  has  since  become  one  of  the  most  important  naval  and 


686 


THE  FAR  EAST 


commercial   stations    of   the   British   Empire.     A   step   was 

taken  also  toward  the  recognition  of  the  equality  of  Great 

Britain  with  China.     It  was  provided  that  henceforth  British 

officials  should  be  treated  as  the  equals  of  Chinese  officials  of 

similar   rank.     The   question   of  the  opium   trade  was   left 

undecided.     The   Chinese   refused   to   legalize   it,   declining, 

as  the}''  said,  "  to  put  a  value  upon  riches  and  to  slight  men's 

lives."     They   were,   however,   afraid   after   their   defeat   to 

enforce   their   prohibition   of  it,   and   the   smuggling   began 

again  and  flourished  more  than  ever.     Owing  to  the  fact  that, 

practically,  the  Chinese  were  not  permitted  by  a  Christian 

nation  to  abolish  an  infamous  traffic  because  it  was  a  very 

lucrative  one,  and  owing  to  the  humiliation  of  their  defeat, 

the    relations    with   Great    Britain    continued   unstable,    and 

even  led  to  another  war. 

Entrance  of       Other  powers   now  proceeded  to   take   advantage   of   the 

.   .    British  success.     The  United  States  sent  Caleb  Cushina:  to 
powers  into  _  ... 

commercial    make  a  commercial  treaty  with  China  in  1844,  and  before 

relations.  long  France,  Belgium,  Holland,  Prussia,  and  Portugal  es- 
tablished trade  centers  at  the  five  treaty  ports.  Some  years 
later  trouble  arose  in  Canton  between  the  English  and  the 
Chinese  which  led  to  a  second  war  with  China.  England  was 
joined  by  France  this  time,  the  reason  for  French  intervention 
being  the  murder  of  a  French  missionary,  an  act  for  which 
no  reparation  could  be  secured.  The  allies  resolved  to 
Treaties  of  carry  the  war  to  the  very  neighborhood  of  Peking,  the  cap- 
Tientsin,  ital.  The  Chinese  Emperor,  therefore,  in  1858,  agreed  to  the 
double  Treaties  of  Tientsin.  By  the  one  with  England,  China 
agreed  henceforth  to  receive  a  British  ambassador,  also  to 
open  more  ports  to  commerce  and  to  receive  British  consuls 
at  the  treaty  ports.  The  treaty  with  France  was  of  much 
the  same  nature,  though  differing  in  details.  These  treaties 
represented  a  great  step  forward  in  the  recognition  of  the 
equality  of  European  powers  with  China,  and  in  furthering 
commercial  intercourse.  But,  the  Chinese  not  carrying  them 
out,  hostilities  were  renewed.     The  allies  again  marched  upon 


EMERGENCE  OF  JAPAN  687 

Peking,  burned  the  Emperor's  beautiful  summer  palace  just 
outside,  and  prepared  to  bombard  the  city.  The  result  was 
that  China  confirmed  the  Treaties  of  Tientsin  and  agreed 
to  pay  additional  war  indemnities  (1860).  Thus  she  was 
brought  into  more  direct  connection  with  the  outside 
world. 

Russia,  which  had  taken  no  part  in  these  proceedings,  knew  ^''issia 

3.I1I16X6S   t)ll6 

how  to  profit  by  them.      It  was  at  this  time  that  she  induced  j^iaritime 
China  to  cede  to  her  the  Maritime  Province,  which  extended  Province, 
her   Pacific    coast   line   seven   hundred   miles    further   south, 
enabling  her  to  found  at  its  southern  port  Vladivostok,  as 
has   already  been  mentioned   (1860). 

The  period  of  greatest  importance  in  China's  relations 
with  Europe  came  in  the  last  decade  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury as  a  result  of  a  war  with  Japan  in  1894-5.  To  appre- 
ciate this  war  it  is  first  necessary  to  give  some  account  of 
the  previous  evolution  of  Japan. 

jy'  JAPAN 

The  rise  of  Japan  as  the  most  forceful  state  in  the  Orient  Japan. 
is  a  chapter  of  very  recent  history,  of  absorbing  interest,  and 
of  great  significance  to  the  present  age.  Accomplished  in 
the  last  third  of  the  nineteenth  century,  it  has  already  pro- 
foundly altered  the  conditions  of  international  politics,  and 
seems  likely  to  be  a  factor  of  increasing  moment  in  the  future 
evolution  of  the  world. 

Japan  is  an  archipelago  consisting  of  several  large  islands  Description 
and  about  four  thousand  smaller  ones.  It  covers  an  area  ^  ^^ 
of  147,000  square  miles, ^  which  is  smaller  than  that  of 
California.  The  main  islands  form  a  crescent,  the  northern 
point  being  opposite  Siberia,  the  southern  turning  in  toward 
Korea.  Between  it  and  Asia  is  the  Sea  of  Japan.  The 
country  is  very  mountainous,  its  most  famous  peak,  Fuji- 
yama rising  to  a  height  of  12,000  feet.  Of  volcanic  origin, 
numerous  craters  are  still  active.  Earthquakes  are  not  un- 
*  Exclusive  of  territories  acquired  since  1894. 


688 


THE  FAR  EAST 


Japanese 
civilization. 


The 
Mikado. 


The 
Shogun. 


common,  and  have  determined  the  character  of  domestic 
architecture.  The  coast  line  is  much  indented,  and  there 
are  many  good  harbors.  The  Japanese  call  their  country 
Nippon,  or  the  Land  of  the  Rising  Sun.  Only  about  one- 
sixth  of  the  land  is  under  cultivation,  owing  to  its  mountain- 
ous character,  and  owing  to  the  prevalent  mode  of  farming. 
Yet  into  this  small  area  is  crowded  a  population  of  about 
fifty  million,  which  is  larger  than  that  of  Great  Britain 
or  France.  It  is  no  occasion  for  surprise  that  the  Japanese 
have   desired   territorial   expansion. 

The  people  of  Japan  derived  the  beginnings  of  their  civili- 
ization  from  China,  but  in  many  respects  they  differed  greatly 
from  the  Chinese.  The  virtues  of  the  soldier  were  held 
in  high  esteem.  Patriotism  was  a  passion,  and  with  it 
went  the  spirit  of  unquestioning  self-sacrifice.  "  Thou  shalt 
honor  the  gods  and  love  thy  country,"  was  a  command  of 
the  Shinto  religion,  and  was  universally  obeyed.  An  art- 
loving  and  pleasure-loving  people,  they  possessed  active 
minds  and  a  surprising  power  of  assimilation  which  they  were 
to  show  on  a  national  and  momentous  scale. 

In  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  their  state  and 
society  were  thoroughly  feudal,  and  presented  many  inter- 
esting points  of  similarity  witli  forms  long  outlived  in 
Europe.  The  Mikado  or  Emperor,  reputed  to  be  the  de- 
scendant of  the  gods,  was  the  head  of  the  nation.  But  while 
he  had  formerly  been  a  powerful  personage  he  had  for  two 
centuries  and  more  sunk  into  a  purely  passive  state.  He 
lived  in  complete  seclusion  in  his  palace  in  Kioto,  took  no 
part  in  the  actual  government,  had  become,  in  fact,  a 
figurehead,  invested  with  a  kind  of  religious  authority  or 
halo,  so  that  many  foreigners  thought  that  he  was  not  the 
Emperor  but  a  sacred  ecclesiastical  personage.  The  real 
authority  was  the  Shogun.  •  The  comparison  is  often  made 
between  the  Shogun  and  the  Frankish  mayor  of  the  palace 
in  Merovingian  times.  Reigning  as  a  mere  servant  of  the 
Mikado,  he  had  known  how  to  acquire  from  the  latter  more 


JAPAN  A  FEUDAL  STATE        689 

and  more  power  in  the  actual  direction  of  affairs  until 
he  was  practically  the  ruler.  He  had  his  own  palace  at 
Yedo,  which  was  the  real  seat  of  government,  and  his  power 
became  hereditary,  passing  from  the  Shogun  to  his  heir 
without  disturbance.  The  Mikado  was  the  nominal,  the 
Shogun  the  real  ruler.  There  were  thus  practically  two 
dynasties.  Beneath  the  Shogun  was  the  military  aristoc-  The 
racy,  the  Daimios,  owners  of  great  estates,  governors  of  Daimios, 
provinces,  and  beneath  them  their  retainers,  the  Samurai,  ®  amurai, 
or  class  of  warriors,  completely  armed  in  coats  of  mail, 
helmets,  and  cuirasses,  not  greatly  dissimilar  from  those  with 
which  Europe  had  been  familiar  centuries  before.  These 
were  the  directing  classes  of  the  state.  Beneath  them  were 
the  masses  of  the  people,  of  no  importance  politically,  mer- 
chants, peasants,  artisans.  Such  was  the  system  that  re- 
mained intact  until  the  remarkable  revolution  which  began  in 
1868.  That  revolution  was  a  direct  result  of  the  insistence  of 
foreign  nations  that  Japan  should  enter  with  them  into  the 
ordinary   relations  that   exist   among  nations. 

For  about  two  hundred  years  Japan  had  been  almost 
hermetically  sealed  against  the  outside  world.  In  the  period 
of  geographical  discoveries  of  the  fifteenth  century,  Zipangu 
had  been  one  of  the  mysteries  and  allurements  of  the  venture- 
some navigators.  Europe  had  a  vague  knowledge  of  the 
existence  of  this  island,  which  was  placed  on  pre-Columbian 
maps  somewhat  east  of  the  present  United  States.  To  clear 
up  this  obscurity,  and  to  find  a  convenient  route  to  the  riches 
which  were  associated  in  men's  minds  with  the  East  gener- 
ally, was  one  of  the  objects  of  the  Spanish  and  Portuguese 
discoverers.  One  of  the  latter,  Pinto,  was  the  first  to  reach  Advent  of 
the  famous  land,  in  1542.  He  was  well  received,  as  were  ^^°P®^^^* 
for  a  time  other  visitors.  In  a  few  years  missionaries  came, 
among  whom  was  Francis  Xavier,  the  Jesuit.  Later  other 
missionaries  appear  to  have  had  very  considerable  success. 
It  is  said  that  in  1581  there  were  two  hundred  churches  and 
50,000  converts,  and  for  some  years  before  1590  it  is  esti- 


690 


THE  FAR  EAST 


Japan 

adopts  a 
policy  of 
isolation. 


Commodore 
Perry. 


mated  that  there  were  10,000  converts  a  year.  But  bitter 
persecutions  of  the  Christians  finally  broke  out,  apparently 
occasioned  by  the  pretensions  and  tactlessness  of  the  bishops, 
and  possibly  by  their  political  intriguing.  A  reaction 
naturally  resulted.  More  than  20,000  converts  were  put  to 
death  in  1591,  amid  fearful  tortures.  The  spirit  of  persecu- 
tion flamed  up  from  time  to  time  in  the  years  following,  cost- 
ing thousands  of  victims.  The  anti-foreign  feeling  grew  so 
strong  that  in  1638  Japan  adopted  a  policy  of  isolation, 
more  rigorous  than  that  of  China.  Foreigners  were  for- 
bidden to  enter  the  country  under  pain  of  death,  and  the 
Japanese  were  forbidden  to  leave  it.  They  were  also  for- 
bidden to  buy  foreign  goods,  and  they  might  sell  only  those 
articles  which  the  Government  permitted,  and  then  only  to 
the  Dutch,  who  were  allowed  a  trading  station  on  the  small 
peninsula  of  Deshima.  This  was  Japan's  sole  point  of  con- 
tact with  the  outside  world  for  over  two  centuries. 

This  unnatural  seclusion  was  rudely  disturbed  b}^  the 
arrival  in  Japanese  waters  of  an  American  fleet  under  Com- 
modore Perry  in  1853,  sent  out  by  the  government  of  the 
United  States.  American  sailors,  engaged  in  the  whale  fish- 
eries in  the  Pacific,  were  now  and  then  wrecked  on  the  coasts 
of  Japan,  where  they  generally  received  cruel  treatment. 
Perry  was  instructed  to  demand  of  the  ruler  of  Japan  pro- 
tection for  American  sailors  and  property  thus  wrecked,  and 
permission  for  American  ships  to  put  into  one  or  more  Jap- 
anese ports,  in  order  to  obtain  necessary  supplies  and  to 
dispose  of  their  cargoes.  He  presented  these  demands  to  the 
Shogun,  supposing  him  to  be  the  sovereign.  He  announced 
further  that  if  his  requests  were  refused,  he  would  open  hos- 
tilities. The  Shogun  granted  certain  immediate  demands, 
but  insisted  that  the  general  question  of  opening  relations 
with  a  foreign  state  required  careful  consideration.  Perry 
consented  to  allow  this  discussion  and  sailed  away,  stating 
that  he  would  return  the  following  year  for  the  final  answer. 
The  discussion  of  the  general  question  on  the  part   of  the 


OPENING  OF  JAPAN  691 

Shogun  and  the  Daimlos,  or  ruling  military  class,  was  very 
earnest.  Some  of  the  latter  believed  in  maintaining  the  old 
policy  of  complete  exclusion  of  foreigners.  Others,  however, 
including  the  Shogun,  believed  this  impossible,  owing  to  the 
manifest  military  superiority  of  the  foreigners.  They  Policy  of 
thought  it  well  to  enter  into  relations  with  them  in  order  to  isolation 
learn  the  secret  of  that  superiority,  and  then  to  appropriate  ^^^^ 
it  for  Japan.  They  believed  this  the  only  way  to  insure,  in 
the  long  run,  the  independence  and  power  of  their  country. 
This  opinion  finally  prevailed,  and  when  Perry  reappeared 
the  Shogun  made  a  treaty  with  him  (1854)  by  which  two 
ports  were  opened  to  American  ships.  This  was  a  mere  be- 
ginning, but  the  important  fact  was  that  Japan  had,  after 
two  centuries  of  seclusion,  entered  into  relations  with  a  for- 
eign state.  Later  other  and  more  liberal  treaties  were  con- 
cluded with  the  United  States  and  with  other  countries. 

The  reaction  of  these  events  upon  the  internal  evolution 
of  Japan  was  remarkable.  They  produced  a  very  critical 
situation,  and  precipitated  a  civil  war.  The  epoch-making  Overthrow 
treaty  had  been  made  by  the  Shogun,  and  one  of  its  results 
was  the  speedy  overthrow  of  the  Shogunate  and  of  the  entire 
feudal  system.  The  Mikado  and  his  supporters  resented 
the  high-handed  action  of  the  Shogun,  nominally  a 
mere  subordinate,  who,  in  a  matter  of  supreme  importance, 
had  not  consulted  the  sovereign.  All  those  members  of  the 
feudal  nobility  who  opposed  the  admission  of  the  foreigners 
sided  with  the  Mikado  in  opposition  to  the  Shogun.  The 
Shogun  and  his  supporters  stood  for  the  policy  of  entering 
into  relations  with  the  outside  powers  for  the  simple  reason 
that  the  latter  had  the  military  force  to  enable  them  to 
impose  their  demands.  The  supporters  of  the  Mikado  were 
themselves  now  convinced  of  that  superiority  in  a  decisive 
manner.  The  popular  hatred  of  foreigners  resulted  In  out- 
rages, several  of  them  by  the  Mikado's  partisans.  One  of 
these  was  upon  an  Englishman,  Richardson,  murdered  In 
1862.     The  English  forthwith  bombarded  Kagoshima,  the 


692 


THE  FAR  EAST 


The 

Mikado 
recovers 
power. 


Rapid  trans- 
formation 
of  Japan. 


stronghold  of  the  anti-foreign  Daimios  (1863).  This  had 
the  result  of  convincing  these  Daimios  of  the  superiority  of 
other  nations  to  Japan,  of  the  uselessness  of  combating  them 
or  trying  to  keep  them  out  of  Japan,  of  the  desirability  of 
adopting  their  civihzation  in  order  to  make  Japan  equally 
powerful.  Thus  they  completely  reversed  their  position, 
and  became  friends  of  the  new  foreign  policy,  instead  of  its 
bitter  opponents.  Other  Daimios  hostile  to  the  foreigners 
were  taught  a  similar  lesson  at  Shimonoseki  (1864).  The 
situation  remained,  however,  confused  and  troubled. 

In  1866  the  Shogun  died,  and  1867  the  Mikado.  The 
successor  to  the  latter  was  Mutsuhito,  the  present  Emperor, 
then  fifteen  years  of  age.  A  civil  war  shortly  broke  out 
between  the  representatives  of  the  Mikado  and  the  sup- 
porters of  the  Shogun.  The  latter  were  repeatedly  de- 
feated. The  Shogunate  was  abolished.  Henceforth  the 
Mikado  was  the  real  as  well  as  the  nominal  head  of  the 
state.  He  abandoned  the  retirement  in  which  his  predeces- 
sors had  lived  so  long,  left  Kioto  in  order  to  emphasize  this 
fact,  and  established  himself  in  Yedo,  previously  the  Sho- 
gun's  capital,  to  which  was  now  given  the  name  Tokio,  the 
Capital  of  the  East  (1868). 

The  collapse  of  the  Shogunate,  and  the  restoration  of 
the  Mikado  to  absolute  power  constituted  the  initial  step 
of  a  remarkable  and  sweeping  transformation  of  Japan, 
the  beginning  of  a  new  era,  which  the  Mikado  himself  called 
the  era  of  "  enlightened  rule."  Japan  revolutionized  her 
political  and  social  institutions  in  a  few  years,  adopted  with 
ardor  the  material  and  scientific  civilization  of  the  West, 
made  herself  in  these  respects  a  European  state,  and  entered 
as  a  result  upon  an  international  career,  which  has  already 
profoundly  modified  the  world,  and  is  likely  to  be  a  constant 
and  an  increasing  factor  in  the  future  development  of  the 
East.  So  complete,  so  rapid,  so  hearty  an  appropriation 
of  an  alien  civilization,  a  civilization  against  which  every 
precaution  of  exclusion  had  for  centuries  been  taken,  is  a 


1 


ADOPTION  OF  EUROPEAN  INSTITUTIONS     693 

change  unique  in  the  history  of  the  world,  and  notable 
for  the  audacity  and  the  intelligence  displayed.  The  en- 
trance upon  this  course  was  a  direct  result  of  Perry's  ex^ 
pedition.  The  Japanese  revolution  will  always  remain  an 
astounding  story.  Once  begun  with  the  abolition  of  the  Sho- 
gunate,  it  proceeded  with  great  rapidity.  In  1871  the  Abolition 
Daimios  or  nobles,  most  of  whom  had  sided  with  the  Mikado,  ^^  ^^® 
voluntarily  relinquished  their  feudal  rights,  and  the  feudal 
system,  which  had  lasted  for  over  eight  hundred  years, 
was  entirely  abolished.  The  old  warrior  class  of  Samurai, 
numbering  about  four  hundred  thousand,  gave  up  their  class 
privileges,  and  became  ordinary  citizens.  All  this  cleared 
the  way  for  a  general  adoption  of  European  institutions. 
In  place  of  the  former  military  class  arose  an  army  based  Adoption  of 

on   European   models.     Military   service   was   declared   uni-  ^^^^P^^^ 

1         1     1  T  •  n-,1      /^  1-1    institutions, 

versal  and  obligatory  ni  1872.     The  German  system,  which 

has  revolutionized  Europe,  began  to  revolutionize  Asia. 
Soldiers  enter  upon  military  service  at  the  age  of  twenty, 
serve  three  years  in  the  active  army,  pass  for  four  into  the 
reserve,  and  are  liable  to  be  called  out  in  any  time  of 
crisis  until  the  age  of  forty.  The  army  was  thus  made 
national.  European  officers  were  imported  to  train  it. 
A  navy  was  started,  and  dockyards  and  arsenals  were 
constructed. 

The  first  railroad  was  begun  in  1870  between  Tokio  and 
Yokohama.  Thirty  years  later  there  were  over  3,600  miles 
in  operation.  To-day  there  are  5,000.  Steam  navigation 
was  begun,  a  telegraph  system  commenced  in  1868,  a  postal 
system  instituted,  and  in  1878  a  Stock  Exchange  and  a 
Chamber  of  Commerce  were  opened  at  Tokio.  The  educa- 
tional methods  of  the  West  were  also  introduced.  A  uni-  Reform  in 
versity  was  established  at  Tokio,  and  later  another  at  Kioto,  ^'^'^cation. 
Professors  from  abroad  were  induced  to  accept  important 
positions  in  them.  Students  showed  great  enthusiasm  in  pur- 
suing the  new  learning.  Public  schools  were  created  rapidly, 
and  by  1883  about  3,300,000  pupils  were  receiving  educa- 


694 


THE  FAR  EAST 


Japan 
becomes  a 
constitu- 
tional 
state. 


tion.  In  188-i  tlie  study  of  English  was  introduced  into 
them.  Compulsory  military  service  and  the  S3'stem  of  educa- 
tion tended  to  fuse  the  people  into  a  homogeneous  whole, 
permeated  with  the  same  spirit  of  progress,  optimism,  and 
patriotism.  Newspapers,  first  permitted  in  1869,  multiplied 
rapidly,  until  in  1882  there  were  over  a  hundred.  Transla- 
tions of  foreign  books  were  published  unceasingly.  Vaccina- 
tion was  introduced,  and  in  1873  the  European  calendar  was 
adopted.  The  codes  of  law,  civil  and  criminal,  and  the  code 
of  judicial  procedure  were  thoroughly  remodeled  after  an 
exhaustive  study  of  European  systems.  The  equality  of  all 
citizens  before  the  law  was  proclaimed,  and  to  crown  this 
work  of  peaceful  revolution  a  constitution  was  granted  by 
the  Mikado.  The  Mikado  had  promised  this  in  1881,  and 
had  declared  that  in  1890  Japan  should  have  a  parliament. 
He  was  true  to  his  word.  In  1881  a  commission,  at  whose 
head  was  Count  Ito,  went  to  Europe  to  study  the  political 
systems  in  operation  there.  After  its  return  the  information 
gathered  was  carefully  studied  by  a  special  body  appointed 
for  the  purpose.  This  body  drafted  a  constitution  in  which 
the  influence  of  England,  the  United  States,  Germany,  and 
other  countries  can  easily  be  traced.  Eight  years  were 
spent  upon  the  elaboration  of  this  document,  which  was  pro- 
claimed in  1889.  It  established  a  parliament  of  two 
chambers,  a  House  of  Peers,  and  a  House  of  Representatives. 
The  vote  for  the  latter  body  was  given  to  men  of  twenty-five 
years  of  age  who  paid  direct  taxes  to  the  state  of  about 
seven  dollars  and  a  half.  This  was  reduced  in  1900  to  those 
paying  about  five  dollars.  The  members  of  the  popular 
house  receive  salaries.  The  constitution  reserves  very  large 
powers  for  the  monarch.  Parliament  met  for  the  first  time 
in  1890. 

Thus  Japan,  as  soon  as  she  recognized  the  superiority 
of  foreign  nations,  reversed  her  long-established  policy  of 
seclusion,  and,  instead  of  lying  helpless  before  them,  studied 
them  carefully,  adopted  all  of  the  machinery  of  their  civihza- 


CHINO-JAPANESE  WAR  695 

tion,  political,  military,  industrial,  intellectual,  that  seemed 
to  promise  advantage,  and  in  a  few  years  emerged  completely 
revolutionized  and  immensely  strengthened.  Not  that  such 
far-reaching  reforms  occasioned  no  dissatisfaction,  for  they 
did — and  even  a  rebellion — which  was  easily  put  down.  The 
test  of  rejuvenated  Japan  came  in  the  last  decade  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  and  the  first  of  the  twentieth,  and  proved  the 
solidity  of  this  amazing  achievement.  During  those  years  Wars  with 
she  fought  and  defeated  two  powers  apparently  much  China  and 
stronger  than  herself,  China  and  Russia,  and  took  her  place 
as  an  equal  in  the  family  of  nations. 

CHINO-JAPANESE  WAR  AND  ITS  CONSEQUENCES 

A  war  in  which  the  efficiency  of  the  transformed  Japan  Cause  of  the 
was  clearly  established  broke  out  with  China  in  1894.  The  '^^f  ^^*^ 
immediate  cause  was  the  relations  of  the  two  powers  to 
Korea,  a  peninsula  lying  between  China  and  Japan,  about 
six  hundred  miles  long,  with  an  area  one-fifth  less  than 
that  of  Great  Britain,  and  a  population  of  ten  or  twelve 
million.  This  territory  was  a  kingdom,  but  both  China 
and  Japan  claimed  suzerainty  over  it.  Japan  had  an  in- 
terest in  extending  her  claims,  as  she  desired  larger  markets 
for  her  products.  Friction  was  frequent  between  the  two 
countries  concerning  their  rights  in  Korea,  as  a  consequence 
of  which  Japan  began  a  war  in  which,  with  her  modern  army, 
she  was  easily  victorious  over  her  giant  neighbor,  whose 
armies  fought  in  the  old  Asiatic  style  with  a  traditional 
Asiatic  equipment.  The  Japanese  drove  the  Chinese  out 
of  Korea,  defeated  their  navy  in  the  battle  of  the  Yalu, 
invaded  Manchuria,  where  they  seized  the  fortress  of  Port 
Arthur,  the  strongest  position  in  eastern  Asia,  occu- 
pied the  Liao-tung  peninsula  on  which  that  fortress  is 
located,  and  prepared  to  advance  toward  Peking.  The 
Chinese,  alarmed  for  their  capital,  agreed  to  make  peace,  gMmono" 
and  signed  the  treaty   of  Shimonoseki    (April   17,   1895),  seki 


696  THE  FAR  EAST 

by  which  they  ceded  Port  Arthur,  tlie  Liao-tung  peninsula, 
the  island  of  Formosa,  and  the  Pescadores  Islands  to  Japan, 
also  agreeing  to  pay  a  large  war  indemnity  of  two  hundred 
million  taels  (about  $175,000,000).  China  recognized  the 
complete  independence  of  Korea. 

But  in  the  hour  of  her  triumph  Japan  was  thwarted  by 
a  European  intervention,  and  deprived  of  the  fruits  of  her 
victory.  Russia  now  entered  in  decisive  fashion  upon  a 
scene  where  she  was  to  play  a  prominent  part  for  the  next 
ten  years.  The  advance  of  Russia  in  eastern  Asia  had 
early  aroused  the  apprehension  of  the  Japanese.  The 
building  of  the  Trans-Siberian  railroad,  begun  in  1891, 
seemed  to  them  to  indicate  that  Russia  was  cherishing  ul- 
terior ambitions.  The  Japanese  felt  that  a  further  increase 
of  Russian  power  in  Asia  would  be  a  menace  to  themselves. 
Their  anxiety  proved  well  founded.  Russia  showed  that  she 
entertained  plans  directly  opposed  to  those  of  the  Japanese. 
Interven-  She  induced  France  and  Germany  to  join  her  in  forcing  them 
tion  of  ^Q  give  up  the  most  important  rewards  of  their  victory,  to 

France'  and  ^^'^^^h  the  conquered  Chinese  had  consented  in  the  treaty. 
Germany.  These  powers  were  determined  that  Japan  should  not  have 
Port  Arthur,  should  not  have  any  foothold  on  the  continent 
of  Asia.  They  therefore  demanded,  "  in  the  cause  of  peace 
and  amity,"  that  the  treaty  be  revised.  The  reason  given 
by  the  Russian  Government  to  the  Japanese  Government  was 
that  "  the  possession  of  the  peninsula  of  Liao-tung,  claimed 
by  Japan,  would  be  a  constant  menace  to  the  capital  of  China, 
would,  at  the  same  time,  render  illusory  the  independence  of 
Korea,  and  would  henceforth  be  a  perpetual  obstacle  to  the 
permanent  peace  of  the  Far  East,"  and  the  Tsar  advised  the 
Mikado  "  to  renounce  the  definite  possession  of  the  peninsula 
of  Liao-tung."  This  was  a  bitter  blow  to  the  Japanese. 
Recognizing,  however,  that  it  would  be  folly  to  oppose  the 

Japan  three  great  military  powers  of  Europe,  they  yielded  to  the 

relinquishes  .,-,.,,  ,  „  *      i  i     i  •        i  /-n  • 

Pqj.^  advice,     restored  Port  Arthur  and  the  pemnsula  to  Chma, 

Arthur.  and  withdrew  from  the  mainland,  indignant  at  the   action 


RUSSIA  AND  MANCHURIA  697 

of  the  powers,  and  resolved  to  increase  their  army  and  navy 
and  develop  their  resources,  believing  that  their  enemy  in 
Asia  was  Russia,  with  whom  a  day  of  reckoning  must  come 
sooner  or  later,  and  confirmed  in  this  belief  by  events  that 
crowded  thick  and  fast  in  the  next  few  years. 

The  insincerity  of  the  powers   in  talking  about  the  in- 
tegrity of  China  and  the  peace  of  the  East  was  not  long 
in  manifesting  itself.     The  intervening  powers  immediately 
set  about  reaping  their  reward.     Russia  secured  the   right  Russian 
to  run  the  eastern  end  of  the  Trans-Siberian  railroad  across  Entrance 

Manchuria,   a   province   of   China,   to   Vladivostok,    and   to  __      ,      . 

,  ...         Manchuria, 

construct  a  branch  line  south  from  Harbin  into  the  Liao- 

tung  peninsula,  with  a  terminus  at  Talienwan.     At  the  end 

of  a  certain  time,  and  under  certain  conditions  this  railroad 

was   to   pass   into   the   possession   of   China,   but  meanwhile 

Russia  was  given  the  right  to  send  her  own  soldiers   into 

Manchuria  to  guard  it.     This  was  the  beginning  of  Russian 

control   of  Manchuria.     She  poured  tens   of  thousands   of 

troops  into  that  Chinese  province,  and  gradually  acted  as 

if  it  were  Russian.      She  also  acquired  extensive  mineral  and 

timber  rights  in  the  province. 

In  1897  two  German  missionaries  were  murdered  in  the 
province  of  Shantung.  The  German  Emperor  immediately  German 
sent  a  fleet  to  demand  redress.  As  a  result  Germany  secured  aggression. 
(March  5,  1898)  from  China  a  ninety-nine  year  lease  of  the 
fine  harbor  of  Kiauchau,  with  a  considerable  area  round 
about,  and  extensive  commercial  and  financial  privileges  in 
the  whole  province  of  Shantung.  Indeed,  that  province  be- 
came a  German  "  sphere  of  influence." 

This  action  encouraged  Russia  to  make  further  demands.  Russia 
She   acquired   from   China    (March   27,   1898)    a   lease    for  ^^'^''''^^ 
twenty-five  years  of  Port  Arthur,  the  strongest  position  in  Arthur, 
eastern  Asia,  which,  as  she  had  stated  to  Japan  in  1895, 
enabled  the  possessor  to  threaten  Peking  and  to  disturb  the 
peace  of  the  Orient.     France  and  England  also  each  acquired 
a  port  on  similar  terms  of  lease.     The  powers  also  forced 


698 


THE  FAR  EAST 


The 

"  Boxer  " 

movement. 


Rescue 
of  the 
Legations. 


China  to  open  a  dozen  new  ports  to  the  trade  of  the  world, 
and  extensive  rights  to  estabhsh  factories  and  build  railways 
and    develop   mines. 

It  seemed,  in  the  summer  of  1898,  that  China  was  about 
to  undergo  the  fate  of  Africa,  that  it  was  to  be  carved  up 
among  the  various  powers.  This  movement  was  checked  by 
the  rise  of  a  bitterly  anti-foreign  party,  occasioned  by  these 
act  of  aggression,  and  culminating  in  the  Boxer  insurrections 
of  1900.  The  "  Boxers  "  were  one  of  the  numerous  secret 
societies  which  abound  in  China.  They  were  vehemently 
opposed  to  foreigners  and  to  the  foreign  ideas  which  their 
own  Emperor,  after  the  defeat  at  the  hands  of  the  Japanese, 
wished  to  adopt.  They  enjoyed  the  support  of  the  Empress- 
Dowager,  aunt  of  the  Emperor,  a  woman  of  remarkable 
force,  who  had  been  for  many  years  the  real  ruler  of  China 
during  the  minority  of  the  latter.  She  now  emerged  from 
her  retirement,  and  by  a  coup  d'etat  pushed  the  Emperor 
aside,  stopping  abruptly  the  liberal  reforms  which  he  was 
inaugurating.  The  Government,  for  she  was  henceforth  the 
leading  power  in  the  state,  was  in  sympathy  and  probably  in 
direct  connivance  with  the  Boxers.  This  movement  grew  rap- 
idly, and  spread  over  northern  China.  Its  aim  was  to  drive  the 
"  foreign  devils  into  the  sea."  Scores  of  missionaries  and 
their  families  were  killed,  and  hundreds  of  Chinese  converts 
murdered  in  cold  blood.  Finally,  the  Legations  of  the  various 
powers  in  Peking  were  besieged,  and  for  weeks  Europe  and 
America  feared  that  all  the  foreigners  there  would  be  mas- 
sacred. In  the  presence  of  this  common  danger  the  powers 
were  obliged  to  drop  their  jealousies  and  rivalries,  and  send 
a  relief  expedition,  consisting  of  troops  from  Japan,  Rus- 
sia, Germany,  France,  Great  Britain,  and  the  United  States. 
The  Legations  were  rescued,  just  as  their  resources  were 
exhausted  by  the  siege  of  two  months  (June  13-August  14, 
1900).  The  international  army  suppressed  the  Boxer  move- 
ment after  a  short  campaign,  forced  the  Chinese  to  pay  a 
large  indemnity,  and  to  punish  the  ringleaders.     In  forming 


APPREHENSIONS  OF  JAPAN  699 

this    international    army,    the    powers    had    agreed    not    to 

acquire  territory,  and  at  the  close  of  the  war  they  guaranteed 

the  integrity  of  China.     Whether  this  would  mean  anything 

remained  to  be  seen. 

The  integrity   of  China  had  been   invoked  in   1895   and  Japan 

ignored  in  the  years  following;.     Russia,  France,  and  Ger-    ^     ^ 
*=  ''  =>  '  '       _  and    appre* 

many  had  appealed  to  it  as  a  reason  for  demanding  the  hensive. 
evacuation  of  Port  Arthur  by  the  Japanese  in  1895.  Soon 
afterward  Germany  had  virtually  annexed  a  port  and  a 
province  of  China,  and  France  had  also  acquired  a  port  in 
the  south.  Then  came  the  most  decisive  act,  the  securing  of 
Port  Arthur  by  Russia.  This  caused  a  wave  of  indignation 
to  sweep  over  Japan,  and  the  people  of  that  counti'y  were 
with  difficulty  kept  in  check  by  the  prudence  of  their  states- 
men. The  acquisition  of  Port  Arthur  by  Russia  meant  that 
now  she  had  a  harbor  ice-free  the  year  round.     That  Russia  Russian 

did  not  look  upon  her  possession  as  merely  a  short  lease,  S'Ctivity  in 

Manchuriac 
but   as   a  permanent  one,  was  unmistakably  shown  by   her 

conduct.  She  constructed  a  railroad  south  from  Harbin, 
connecting  with  the  Trans-Siberian.  She  threw  thousands  of 
troops  into  Manchuria ;  she  set  about  immensely  strengthening 
Port  Arthur  as  a  fortress,  and  a  considerable  fleet  was  sta- 
tioned there.  To  the  Japanese  all  this  seemed  to  prove  that 
she  purposed  ultimately  to  annex  the  immense  province  of 
Manchuria,  and  later  probably  Korea,  which  would  give  her 
a  large  number  of  ice-free  harbors  and  place  her  in  a  dominant 
position  on  the  Pacific,  menacing,  the  Japanese  felt,  the  very 
existence  of  Japan.  Moreover,  this  would  absolutely  cut 
off^  all  chance  of  possible  Japanese  expansion  in  these  direc- 
tions, and  of  the  acquisition  of  their  markets  for  Japanese 
industries.  The  ambitions  of  the  two  powers  to  dominate 
the  East  clashed,  and,  in  addition,  to  Japan  the  matter 
seemed  to  involve  her  permanent  safety,  even  in  her  island 
empire. 

Meanwhile,  the  other  powers,  observing  the  increasing  Rus- 
sian   control    of   Manchuria,    repeatedly    asked    that   power 


700 


THE   FAR   EAST 


Diplomatic 
negotiations 
concerning 
Manchuria. 


The  Anglo- 
Japanese 
Treaty  of 
1902. 


her  intentions.  Russian  annexation  of  Manchuria  would 
probably  mean  the  closing  of  that  province  to  the  commerce 
ot  the  rest  of  the  world.  The  powers  were,  therefore,  in- 
sistent, particularly  the  United  States  and  England,  in  urg- 
ing the  policy  of  the  "  open  door."  Russia  gave  the  powers 
the  formal  promise  to  withdraw  from  Manchuria  "  as  soon 
as  lasting  order  shall  have  been  established  "  there,  but  she 
steadily  refused  to  specify  the  date,  and  this  became,  there- 
fore, one  of  the  subjects  of  diplomatic  negotiation. 

Japan's  prestige  at  this  time  was  greatly  increased  by  a 
treaty  concluded  with  England  in  1902,  establishing  a  de- 
fensive alliance  according  to  wdiich  the  two  powers  "  actu- 
ated solely  by  a  desire  to  maintain  the  status  quo  and  general 
peace  in  the  extreme  East,  being,  moreover,  especially  inter- 
ested in  maintaining  the  territorial  integrity  of  the  Empire  of 
China  and  the  Empire  of  Korea,  and  in  securing  equal  oppor- 
tunities in  those  countries  for  the  commerce  and  industry  of 
all  nations,"  agreed,  among  other  things,  to  remain  strictly 
neutral  in  case  either  power  became  involved  in  a  war  con- 
cerning these  matters,  but  also  agreed  that  if  a  third  power 
should  join  the  enemy  against  the  ally,  then  the  second 
power  would  drop  its  neutrality  and  come  to  the  assistance 
of  its  ally,  making  war  and  peace  in  common  with  it.  This 
meant  that  if  France  or  Germany  should  aid  Russia  in  a 
war  with  Japan,  then  England  would  aid  Japan.  In  a 
war  between  Russia  and  Japan  alone  England  would  be 
neutral.  This  treaty  was,  therefore,  of  great  practical 
importance  to  Japan,  and  it  also  increased  her  prestige.  For 
the  first  time  in  history,  an  Asiatic  power  had  entered  into 
an  alliance  with  a  European  power  on  a  plane  of  entire 
equality.  Japan  had  entered  the  family  of  nations,  and 
it  was  remarkable  evidence  of  her  importance  that  Great 
Britain  saw  advantage  in  an  alliance  with  her. 

Russia,  with  the  other  powers,  had  recognized  the  integrity 
of  China.  Her  position  differed  from  theirs  in  that  she 
had  a  large  anny  in  Manchuria,   a  Chinese  province,   and 


THE  RUSSO-JAPANESE  WAR  701 

a  leasehold  of  the  strong  fortress  and  naval  base  of  Port 
Arthur.  She  had  definitely  promised  to  withdraw  from  Man- 
churia when  order  should  be  restored,  but  she  declined  to 
make  the  statement  more  explicit.  Her  military  prepara-  Japan 
tions  increasing  all  the  while,  the  Japanese  demanded  of  her  makes  wai 
the  date  at  which  she  intended  to  withdraw  her  troops  from  j^uggia. 
Manchuria,  order  having  apparently  been  restored.  Nego- 
tiations between  the  two  powers  dragged  on  from  August 
1903  to  February  1904.  Japan,  believing  that  Russia  was 
merely  trying  to  gain  time  to  tighten  her  grip  on  Manchuria 
by  elaborate  and  intentional  delay  and  evasion,  and  to  pro- 
long the  discussion  until  she  had  sufficient  troops  in  the 
province  to  be  able  to  throw  aside  the  mask,  suddenly  broke 
off  diplomatic  relations  and  commenced  hostilities.  On  the 
night  of  the  8th-9th  of  February,  1904,  the  Japanese  tor- 
pedoed a  part  of  the  Russian  fleet  before  Port  Arthur  and 
threw  their  armies  into  Korea. 

The  Russo-Japanese   war,  thus  begun,  lasted   from  Feb-  B,usso- 
ruary   1904  to   September   1905.       It  was   fought  on  both    ^^^"fgQ^, 
land  and  sea.      Russia  had  two  fleets  in  Asiatic  waters,  one  1905. 
at  Port  Arthur  and  one  at  Vladivostok.     Her  land  connec- 
tion with  eastern  Asia  was  by  the  long  single  track  of  the 
Trans-Siberian   railway.     Japan   succeeded   in   bottling   the 
Port  Arthur  fleet  at  the  very  outset  of  the  war.      Controlling 
the   Asiatic   waters   she   was    able   to   transport    armies    and 
munitions  to  the  scene  of  the  land  warfare  with  only  slight 
losses  at  the  hands  of  the  Vladivostok  fleet.     One  army  drove 
the  Russians  out  of  Korea,  back  from  the  Yalu.     Another 
under  General  Qku  landed  on  the  Liao-tung  peninsula  and 

cut    off   the   connections    of   Port  Arthur   with   Russia.     It  ^^^^ 

Port 

attempted  to  take  Port  Arthur  by  assault,  but  was  unable  Arthur, 
to  carry  it,  and  finally  began  a  siege.  This  siege  was  con- 
ducted by  General  Nogi,  General  Oku  being  engaged  in 
driving  the  Russians  back  upon  Mukden.  The  Russian 
General  Kuropatkin  marched  south  from  Mukden  to  relieve 
Port   Arthur.       South   of   Mukden   great   battles    occurred. 


702 


THE  FAR  EAST 


Mukden 
captured 
by  the 
Japanese. 


Destruction 
of  the 
Russian 
fleet,  May 
27,   1905. 


The  Treaty 
of  Ports 
mouth. 


that  of  Liao-yang,  engaging  probably  half  a  million  men  and 
lasting  several  days,  resulted  in  a  victory  of  the  Japanese, 
who  entered  Liao-yang  September  4,  1904.  Their  objective 
now  was  Mukden.  Meanwhile,  in  August,  the  Japanese  had 
defeated  disastrously  both  the  Port  Arthur  and  Vladivostok 
fleets,  eliminating  them  from  the  war.  The  terrific  bombard- 
ment of  Port  Arthur  continued  until  that  fortress  surren- 
dered after  a  siege  of  ten  months,  costing  the  Japanese 
60,000  in  killed  and  wounded  (January  1,  1905).  The  army 
which  had  conducted  this  siege  was  now  able  to  march  north- 
ward to  co-operate  with  General  Oku  around  Mukden.  There 
several  battles  were  fought,  the  greatest  since  the  Franco- 
German  war  of  1870,  lasting  in  each  case  several  days.  The 
last,  at  Mukden  (March  6-10,  1905),  cost  both  armies 
120,000  men  killed  and  wounded  in  four  days'  fighting.  The 
Russians  were  defeated  and  evacuated  Mukden,  leaving  40,- 
000  prisoners  in  the  hands  of  the  Japanese. 

Another  incident  of  the  war  was  the  sending  out  from 
Russia  of  a  new  fleet  under  Admiral  Rodj est vensky,  which, 
after  a  long  voyage,  was  attacked  at  its  close  by  Admiral 
Togo  as  it  entered  the  Sea  of  Japan  and  annihilated  in 
the  great  naval  battle  of  the  Straits  of  Tsushima,  May  27, 
1905. 

The  two  powers  finally  consented,  at  the  suggestion  of 
President  Roosevelt,  to  send  delegates  to  Portsmouth,  New 
Hampshire,  to  see  if  the  war  could  be  brought  to  a  close. 
The  result  was  the  signing  of  the  Treaty  of  Portsmouth, 
September  5,  1905.  The  war  between  Japan  and  Russia 
had  been  fought  in  lands  belonging  to  neither  power,  in 
Korea,  and  principally  in  Manchuria,  a  province  of  China, 
yet  Korea  and  China  took  no  part  in  the  war,  were  passive 
spectators,  powerless  to  preserve  the  neutrality  of  their  soil 
or  their  independent  sovereignty. 

By  the  Treaty  of  Portsmouth  Russia  recognized  Japan's 
paramount  interests  in  Korea,  which  country,  however,  was 
to  remain  independent.     Both  the  Russians  and  the  Japanese 


..v> 


Z^;^/.,-^        romboh  )  Ceylon   di^ 


^\L\N    OG 


'  Lungiludf  _ 


ASIA 


RESULTS  OF  RUSSO-JAPANESE  WAR       703 

were  to  evacuate  Manchuria.  Russia  transferred  to  Japan 
her  lease  of  Port  Arthur  and  the  Liao-tung  peninsula,  and 
ceded  the  soutliern  half  of  the  island  of  Saghalin. 

Japan  thus  stood  forth  the  dominant  power  of  the  Orient. 
She  had  expanded  in  ten  years  by  the  annexation  of  For- 
mosa and  Saghalin.  She  has  not  regarded  Korea  as  in- 
dependent, but  since  the  close  of  the  war  has  virtually,  though 
not  nominally,  annexed  her.^  She  possesses  Port  Arthur, 
and  her  position  in  Manchuria  is  one  giving  rise  at  the  pres- 
ent moment  to  diplomatic  discussion.  She  has  an  army  of 
600,000  men,  equipped  with  all  the  most  modern  appliances 
of  destruction,  a  navy  about  the  size  of  that  of  France, 
flourishing  industries,  and  flourishing  commerce.  The  drain 
upon  her  resources  during  the  past  ten  years  has  been  tre- 
mendous, and,  appreciating  the  need  of  many  years  of  quiet 
recuperation  and  upbuilding,  she  was  willing  to  make  the 
Peace  of  Portsmouth.  Her  financial  difficulties  are  great, 
imposing  an  abnormally  heavy  taxation.  No  people  has 
accomplished  so  vast  a  transformation  in  so  short  a  time. 

The  Russo-Japanese  war  cannot  be  said  to  have  settled 
the  Far  Eastern  Question,  as  the  future  of  China  is  called. 
Wars  may  yet  grow  out  of  it.  But  if  they  do,  it  seems 
likely  that  a  new  factor  will  have  to  be  considered,  a  re- 
juvenated and  modern  China.  For  the  lesson  of  these  events  Reaction 
has  not  been  lost  upon  the  Chinese.  The  victories  of  Japan,  °^  these 
an  Oriental  state,  over  a  great  Occidental  power,  as  well 
as  over  China,  has  convinced  many  influential  Chinese  of 
the  advantage  to  be  derived  from  an  adoption  of  Euro- 
pean methods,  an  appropriation  of  European  knowledge. 
Moreover,  they  see  that  the  only  way  to  repel  the  aggres- 

^  By  an  agreement  signed  by  Korea  and  Japan,  November  17,  1905,  the 
control  of  the  foreign  relations  of  Korea  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
Japanese  Government.  It  was  also  provided  that  a  Japanese  Resident- 
General  should  be  stationed  in  Seoul.  By  a  subsequent  agreement,  signed 
by  the  same  parties,  July  31,  1907,  all  administrative  measures  and  all 
high  official  appointments  are  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Resident- 
General.     Japanese  subjects  are  eligible  to  official  positions  in  Korea. 


events  upon 
China. 


70J<  THE  FAR  EAST 

sions  of  outside  powers  is  to  be  equipped  with  the  weapons 
used  by  the  aggressor. 

This  change  of  attitude  was  represented  after  the  Boxer 
rebeUion  by  the  Empress-Dowager  herself,  upon  whom  the 
invasion  of  her  capital  by  the  international  army  in  1900 
and  the  punishment  inflicted  upon  the  country  were  not  lost. 
Returning  to  Peking  she  showed  herself  more  accessible  to 
foreigners  and  foreign  ideas,  and  after  1900  she  began  to 
approve  of  reforms  more  far-reaching  than  those  for  which 
in  1898  she  had  put  men  to  death. 
China  in  jjj  ly^Q  j^st  few  years  the  leaven  of  reform  has  been  work- 

?^^°^  .        _  ing  fruitfull}^   in   the  Middle  Kingdom.       A  military   spirit 
tion.  has  arisen  in  this  state,  which  formerly  despised  the  martial 

virtues.  Under  the  direction  of  Japanese  instructors  a 
Chinese  army  is  being  constructed  after  European  models, 
equipped  in  the  European  fashion.  The  acquisition  of 
western  knowledge  is  encouraged.  Students  are  going  in 
large  numbers  to  foreign  countries,  European,  American, 
20,000  of  them  to  Japan.  The  State  encourages  the  proc- 
ess by  throwing  open  the  civil  service,  that  is,  official  careers 
to  those  who  obtain  honors  in  examinations  in  western  sub- 
jects. Schools  are  being  opened  throughout  the  country. 
Even  public  schools  for  girls  have  been  established,  a  re- 
markable fact  for  any  Oriental  country.  Railroads  are 
being  built,  and  the  Chinese  have  begun  the  economic  de- 
velopment of  their  country,  and  are  buying  back  where 
possible  the  concessions  for  mines  and  railways  formerly 
granted  to  foreigners.  In  1906  an  edict  was  issued  aiming 
at  the  prohibition  of  the  use  of  opium  within  ten  years. 

Moreover,  the  absolute  monarchy  is  about  to  be  changed 
into  a  constitutional  one,  the  people  of  China  are  to  receive 
political  power  and  education.  An  imperial  commission 
was  sent  to  Europe  in  1905  to  study  the  representative 
systems  of  various  countries,  and  on  its  return  a  committee, 
consisting  of  many  high  dignitaries,  was  appointed  to  study 
its  report. 


CHINA  PROMISED  A  CONSTITUTION        705 

In  August  1908  an  official  edict  was  issued  promising,  in  China 

tlie  name  of  the  Emperor,  a  constitution  in  1917,  and  setting         ^.^  ^. 

.  .     constitution. 

forth  in  detail  the  stages  that  will  be  reached  each  year  in 
the  conversion  of  the  form  of  government  until  the  new 
system  is  completely  established.  A  piquant  and  highly 
modern  illustration  of  the  swift  interplay  of  the  nations  in 
these  days  of  world  politics,  of  instantaneous  transmission 
of  news,  is  furnished  by  the  action  of  Chinese  reformers,  who 
have  urged  that  China  should  not  lag  behind  Turkey  and 
Persia,  themselves  very  recent  converts,  indeed,  to  the  faith 
in  constitutions  and  parliaments,  a  faith  which  has  spread  so 
astoundingly  since  1815  and  which  is  fast  winning  the  last  re- 
treats of  absolutism. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 
RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


Unpopu- 
larity in 
Russia  of 
the  war 
with  Japan. 


Open  ex- 
pression 
of  the 
popular 
discontent. 


We  are  now  in  a  position  to  follow  with  some  under- 
standing the  very  recent  history  of  Russia,  a  history  at 
once  crowded,  intricate,  turbulent,  the  outcome  of  which 
is  certainly  obscure,  but  which  seems  to  be  the  dawn  of 
a  new  era — a  dawn,  however,  still  heavily  overcast  and  lower- 
ing. That  history  is  the  record  of  the  reaction  of  the 
Japanese  war  upon  Russia  herself,  a  war  which  may  prove 
to  be  as  far-reaching  in  its  effects  upon  the  Russian  state 
and  people  as  it  has  already  proved  itself  to  be  upon  Japan 
and  China. 

That  war  was  from  the  beginning  unpopular  with  the 
Russians.  Consisting  of  a  series  of  defeats,  its  unpopu- 
larity only  increased,  and  the  indignation  and  wrath  of 
the  people  were  shown  during  its  course  in  many  ways. 
The  Government  Avas  justly  held  responsible,  and  was  dis- 
credited by  its  failure.  As  it  added  greatly  to  the  already 
existing  discontent,  the  plight  in  which  the  Government  found 
itself  rendered  it  powerless  to  repress  the  popular  expression 
of  that  discontent  in  the  usual  summary  fashion.  There  was 
for  many  months  extraordinary  freedom  of  discussion, 
of  the  press,  of  speech,  cut  short  now  and  then  by  the 
officials,  only  to  break  out  later.  The  war  with  Japan 
had  for  the  Government  most  unexpected  and  unwelcome 
consequences.     The  very  winds  were  let  loose. 

The  war  began  early  in  February  1904.  At  a  meeting 
of  the  Institute  of  Mining  Engineers  at  St.  Petersburg  on 
February  23d,  a  resolution  was  passed  stating  "  that  the 
war  with  Japan  has  its  origin  in  a  policy  conceived  solely 
in  the  interests  of  a  small  privileged  minority,  to  the  detri- 

706 


ASSASSINATION  OF  PLEHVE  707 

nient  of  the  vast  majority  of  the  Russian  people,  and  that 
it  is  the  result  of  the  spirit  of  reckless  adventure  which 
characterizes  the  enterprises  of  the  Government  in  the  Far 
East."  The  Institute  accordingly  expressed  its  "  profound 
dissatisfaction  with  the  Government,  which  is  the  responsible 
author  of  this  fresh  national  misfortune,"  and  denounced  the 
war  as  "  at  once  inhuman  and  contrary  to  the  interests  of  the 
people." 

The    Minister    of   the   Interior,   in   whose   hands    lay    the  Von  Plehve's 
maintenance  of  public  order,  was  at  this  time  Von  Plehve,  one  ^^°^  regime, 
of  the  most  bitterly  hated  men  in  recent  Russian  history. 
Von  Plehve  had  been  in  power  since  1902,  and  had  revealed  a 
character  of  unusual  harshness.       He  had  incessantly   and 
pitilessly  prosecuted  liberals  everywhere,  had  filled  the  pris- 
ons with  his  victims,  had  been  the  center  of  the  movement 
against  the  Finns,  previously  described,  and  seems  to  have 
secretly    favored    the    horrible    massacres    of    Jews    which 
occurred  at  this  time.      He  was  detested  as  few  men  have 
been.     He  attempted  to  suppress  in  the  usual  manner  the 
rising  volume  of  criticism  occasioned  by  the  war  by  applying 
the  same  ruthless  methods  of  breaking  up  meetings,  exiling 
to    Siberia   students,    professional   men,   workmen.     He   was  Assassina- 
killed  July  1904  by  a  bomb  thrown  under  his  carriage  by  a  *^°^  °^ 
former  student.     Russia  breathed  more  easily.     There  im- 
mediately appeared  a  document  which  throws  a  remarkable 
light  on  the  meaning  of  assassination  in  the  minds  of  the 
more  radical  revolutionists  in  Russia.     This  was  "  an  appeal 
to  the  citizens  of  the  world,"  issued  by  the  central  committee 
of  the  Revolutionary  Socialist  party.     Assuming  responsi- 
bility for  the  "  righteous  act,"  and  announcing  its  decision 
to  put  an  end  to  Tsardom,  it  stated  that  Plehve  had  been 
"  executed  "  because  of  the  relentless  policy  of  repression  and 
reprisals,  which  he  had  applied  against  all  those  who  strove 
for   freedom   in   Russia.     "  The   necessary   violence   of   our      K-iissian 
methods  of  combat,"  the  appeal  concluded,  "  should  not  hide  assassina- 
from  any  one  the  truth.     We  disapprove  absolutely     .     .     .  tion. 


708        RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

a  terrorist  policy  in  countries  that  are  free.  But  in  Russia, 
where,  owing  to  the  reign  of  despotism,  no  open  poHtical 
discussion  is  possible,  where  there  is  no  redress  against  the 
irresponsibility  of  absolute  power  throughout  the  whole  bu- 
reaucratic organization,  we  shall  be  obliged  to  fight 
the  violence  of  tyranny  with  the  force  of  revolutionary 
right." 

Nicholas  II       The  Emperor  Nicholas   II  now  showed  a  disposition  to 

enters  upon  (depart  somewhat  from  the  rigorous  policy  of  Von  Plehve. 

liberal  nath  ^^  appointed  as  Minister  of  Home  Affairs  in  September, 
Prince  Sviatopolk  Mirski,  a  man  of  liberal  tendencies.  The 
new  minister  announced  "  that  though  the  Russian  people 
are  as  yet  unfit  for  constitutional  government,  the  local  rep- 
resentative institutions  of  the  Empire  (the  zemstvos)  might 
be  given  greater  freedom  of  action  and  larger  opportunities 
without  risk  to  the  established  system,"  and  he  spoke  of 
"  sincere  confidence  in  the  people  "  as  essential  to  good  gov- 
ernment. This  aroused  the  hopes  of  the  liberals.  The  press 
was  allowed  great  freedom,  which  it  used  to  express  the 
people's  demands,  and  in  November  1904  representatives 
from  the  zemstvos  were  permitted  to  meet  in  St.  Petersburg 
to  state  and  discuss  what  they  considered  the  needs  of  the 
countr3^  Many  other  bodies  did  the  same.  Lawyers,  acad- 
emic and  professional  faculties,  learned  societies,  city  councils, 
all  criticised  existing  abuses  and  demanded  remedies.  Never 
had  the  Russian  people  uttered  their  desires  so  freely.  A 
few  months  before  under  Plehve  such  meetings  would  have 
been  broken  up  and  their  participants  treated  with  customary 
severity. 

Demands  of  It  appeared  from  all  these  expressions  of  opinion  that 
■  though  the  liberals  differed  from  each  other  on  many  matters, 
they  were  agreed  on  certain  points.  They  demanded  that 
the  reign  of  law  be  established  in  Russia,  that  the  era  of 
bureaucratic  and  police  control,  recognizing  no  limits  of  in- 
quisition and  of  cruelty,  should  cease.  They  demanded  the 
individual  rights  usual  in  western  Europe,  freedom  of  con- 


WIDESPREAD  DISORDER  709 

science,  of  speech,  of  publication,  of  public  meetings  and 
associations,  of  justice  administered  by  independent  judges, 
of  legal  trials  for  alleged  lawbreakers.  They  also  demanded 
greater  participation  of  the  people  in  local  government, 
some  sort  of  a  national  parliament  which  should  share  in 
making  the  laws  of  the  Empire,  and  which  should  control 
the  officials,  and  a  national  constituent  assembly,  to  be  sum- 
moned immediately,  with  power  to  frame  a  constitution  em- 
bodying these  privileges  in  fundamental  law.  The  last  two 
demands  were  considered  by  far  the  most  important — a 
convention  to  give  a  constitution  to  Russia,  and  a  parlia- 
ment henceforth  to  make  the  laws.  But,  however  passionate  Not  granted 
and  universal  the  demands,  the  Tsar  showed  no  inclination  to  ^y  *^®  Tsa.r- 
grant  them,  and  the  discontent  continued,  fanned  by  the 
disclosures  of  the  war,  which  grew  ever  more  unpopular 
and  disastrous  as  it  progi'essed.  Thousands  of  soldiers  of 
the  reserve,  called  out,  escaped  to  Germany  and  Austria. 
Others  were  forced,  only  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet,  into  widespread 
the  trains  that  were  to  carry  them  to  Manchuria.  Hundreds  disorder, 
of  thousands  of  workmen  were  thrown  out  of  employment 
by  the  failure  of  business  enterprises,  caused  by  the  war; 
the  harvest  was  bad,  and  it  was  found  that  the  officials  were 
enriching  themselves  at  the  expense  of  the  nation's  honor, 
selling  for  private  gain  supplies  intended  for  the  army, 
even  seizing  the  funds  of  the  Red  Cross  Society.  The  war 
continued  to  be  a  series  of  humiliating  and  sanguinary  de- 
feats, and  on  January  1,  1905,  came  the  surrender  of  Port 
Arthur  after  a  fearful  siege. 

The  revolutionary  agitation  continued.  The  people  de- 
sired concessions  from  the  Tsar,  but  none  came  from  him. 
University  students  in  Moscow  and  St.  Petersburg  marched 
through  the  streets  shouting,  "  Down  with  autocracy ! " 
"  Stop  the  war ! "  Finally,  the  Tsar  spoke.  Toward  the  The  Tsar 
end  of  December  1904  he  issued  a  decree  in  reply  to  the  announces 

public  demands.     In  it  he  stated  the  reforms  which  he  con-  ^^^  i»ten- 

. ,  tions. 

sidered    were    most   needed,    and    ordered    the    ministers    to 


710       RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

prepare  the  laws  necessary  to  effect  them.  Some  of  these 
were  identical  wnth  the  wishes  expressed  by  the  zemstvos 
and  the  other  assemblies,  but  the  reformers  noticed  one 
critical  omission.  There  was  no  mention  of  a  national 
assembly.  It  was  clear  that,  while  the  Emperor  might  grant 
some  reforms,  he  had  no  intention  of  reducing  his  own  auto- 
cratic powers,  of  restricting  the  bureaucracy,  or  of  allowing 
the  people  any  share  in  the  government. 
Popular  The  agitation,  therefore,   continued  unabated,  more  and 

dissatisfac-    niore  embittered  as  the  w'ar  progressed.      January  was  sig- 
nalized by  an  event  that  aroused  the  horror  of  the  civilized 
continuance  *^ 

of  disorder,  world — the  slaughter  of  "  Bloody  Sunday  "  (January  22, 
1905).  Workmen  in  immense  numbers,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  a  radical  priest.  Father  Gapon,  tried  to  approach 
the  Imperial  Palace  in  St.  Petersburg,  hoping  to  be  able 
to  la}'^  their  grievances  directly  before  the  Emperor,  as  they 
had  no  faith  in  any  of  the  officials.  Instead  of  that,  they 
were  attacked  by  the  Cossacks  and  the  regular  troops  and 
the  result  was  a  fearful  loss  of  life,  how  large  cannot  be 
accurately  stated. 

All  through  the  year  1905  tumults  and  disturbances  oc- 
curred. Prince  Sviatopolk  Mirski,  ill,  foiled  at  every  step, 
and  undermined  by  reactionaries,  was  replaced  by  Buliguin 
(February  1905).  The  Government  resumed  its  customary 
methods.  Deeds  of  violence  and  repression  on  its  part  were 
met  in  turn  by  assassinations  and  bomb-throwing  on  the  part 
of  the  revolutionists.  Immense  strikes  were  organized.  Peas- 
ants burned  the  houses  of  the  nobles.  Mutinies  in  the  army 
and  navy  were  frequent.  The  uncle  of  the  Tsar,  the  Grand 
Duke  Sergius,  one  of  the  most  pronounced  reactionaries  in 
the  Empire,  who  had  said  "  the  people  wants  the  stick," 
was  assassinated.  Russia  was  in  a  state  bordering  on 
anarchy.      Finally  the  Tsar  sought  to  reduce  the  ever-mount- 

ing  spirit  of  opposition  by  issuing  a  manifesto,  concerning 
Manifesto  .  i  i  i  •  i  i  ■  i       j 

of  August     ^"^    representative   assembly    which   w^as    so   vehemently    de- 

19,  1905.        manded  (August  19,  1905). 


MANIFESTO  OF  AUGUST  19,  1905  711 

In  this  he  announced  that  "  while  preserving  the  funda- 
mental law  regarding  the  autocratic  power,"  he  had  resolved 
to  call,  not  later  than  January  1906,  a  state  council,  or 
Duma,  consisting  of  elected  representatives  from  the  whole 
of  Russia.  But  this  manifesto  was  only  another  disappoint- 
ment to  the  reformers,  as  the  Duma  was  to  be  merely  a 
consultative  body,  not  a  real  legislature,  as  the  elections  to 
it  were  to  be  conducted  by  the  very  class  most  hated  and  dis- 
trusted, the  bureaucracy,  as  the  working  and  professional 
classes  were  not  given  the  suffrage,  and  as  the  sessions  of 
the  Duma  were  not  to  be  public.  How  small  the  electorate 
was  to  be  was  shown  from  the  fact  that  St.  Petersburg,  with 
a  population  of  over  a  million  and  a  half,  v/ould  have  only 
nine  thousand  five  hundred  voters. 

Feeling,  therefore,  that  the  Emperor's  concessions  were 
inadequate  and  illusory,  that  Russia  must  be  assured  far 
greater  liberties,  the  revolutionary  parties  continu(jd  their 
agitation.  An  agency  of  great  effect  when  completely  ap- 
plied was  now  resorted  to,  the  general  strike.  Under  present 
conditions,  when  governments  dispose  of  large,  well-equipped 
armies  against  which  the  people  are  powerless  to  fight,  this 
is  a  weapon  of  immense  value.  It  is,  however,  difficult  to  set  The  resort 
in  operation,  involving,  as  it  does,  the  co-operation  of  vast 
numbers  in  a  strike,  which  can  be  maintained  only  if  the  strike, 
strikers  have  reserve  funds  large  enough  to  prevent  starva- 
tion. In  Russia  in  October  1905  the  attempt  was  made. 
It  began  with  a  railway  strike,  which  included  the  whole 
Empire,  and  which  cut  off  all  communication  both  within 
Russia  and  with  the  outside  world.  Any  one  wishing  to 
travel  was  forced  to  use  the  ordinary  highways  or  the  water, 
if  that  were  possible.  Commerce  was  tied  up.  Merchants 
could  neither  ship  nor  receive  goods.  Similar  strikes  oc- 
curred in  most  of  the  great  factories.  Practically  all  shops, 
except  provision  stores,  were  closed.  In  the  large  towns 
the  gas  and  electric  light  companies  ceased  to  operate. 
Druggists  refused  to  sell  medicines  until  reforms  should  be 


712       RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

granted.  The  students  of  the  universities  struck,  lawyers 
also ;  the  law  courts  were  closed.  No  newspapers  appeared. 
Stocks  fell  rapidly. 

This    sharp,    sweeping   suspension    of   the    ordinary    and 
necessary  activities  of  life  created  an  insupportable  situation, 
and  exerted  a  terrific  pressure  on  the  Government.      It  was 
The  an  extraordinarily  dramatic  protest  against  misrule.     Forced 

Manifesto  of  ^^      -^jj    ^^   l^^^^.   somewhat,   the   Tsar   issued  a   manifesto 
October,  ./         '  '  _  .  r 

1905.  October  30,  1905,  granting  "  the  immutable  foundations  of 

civic  liberty,"  freedom  of  speech,  of  conscience,  of  association, 
extending  the  suffrage  to  those  then  lacking  it,  leaving  the 
matter  of  the  permanent  franchise  to  be  determined  by  the 
Duma,  and,  most  important  of  all,  establishing  "  as  an  im- 
mutable rule  that  no  law  can  come  into  force  without  the 
approval  of  the  Duma,  and  that  it  shall  be  possible  for  the 
representatives  of  the  people  to  participate  effectively  in 
the  supervision  of  the  legality  of  the  acts  of  the  public  offi- 
cials." Count  Witte  Avas  at  the  same  time  appointed  prime 
minister,  and  Pobyedonostseff,  hated  by  all  liberals  as  the 
very  soul  of  the  cruel  government  of  the  last  twenty  years, 
was  removed  from  his  position. 

But  it  was  evident  that  the  police  and  bureaucrats  in- 
tended to  continue  their  usual  practice  of  breaking  up  meet- 
ings, shooting,  and  arresting  at  will.  Moreover,  the  revolu- 
tionists were  not  satisfied  with  the  Tsar's  concessions,  but 
demanded  the  convocation  of  an  assembly  elected  by  univer- 
llie  sal  suffrage  which  should  draw  up  a  constitution  for  Russia, 

popular  ^g   ^  preliminarv  step   absolutely   essential  to   reassure   the 

demand   for  ^  ~  ^  ^  mi  -i  j. 

a  constitu-    people.      This  the  Tsar  would  not  grant.       Ihe  strike  went 

ent  assem-  on  through  November,  new  classes  joining  it,  such  as  the 
bly  refused,  lei^te,,  carriers  and  telegraph  operators.  Dangerous  mutinies 
in  the  army  and  navy  were  frequent,  and  brutal  and  bloody 
attacks  upon  the  Jews,  inspired  in  many  cases  by  Government 
officials,  shocked  the  Avestern  world.  There  was  much  street 
fighting  in  Moscow  and  other  places.  The  Government  re- 
fused the  constituent  assembly,  but  it  ordered  the  elections 


THE  ELECTION  OF  THE  DUMA  713 

for  the  Duma  to  be  held.      Moreover,  it  made  concessions  The  Govern- 
to  Finland  which  brought  peace  to  that  distracted  country,  ^^^^  "^^^" 

°       ^  1        1     1       1     /»  1     concessions 

by   restoring  the  rights   enjoyed  by   the  duchy  before  the  ^^  Finland. 

late  usurpations.  Russia  continued  in  a  highly  troubled 
state,  in  fact,  an  irregular  kind  of  civil  war  between  re- 
actionaries seeking  to  recover  lost  ground  and  revolution- 
ists bent  upon  preventing  a  return  to  the  old  conditions. 
That  the  old  odious  methods  were  still  extremely  vigorous 
was  shown  by  the  fact  that,  in  January  1906  alone,  78 
newspapers  were  suspended,  58  editors  arrested,  and  thou- 
sands of  people  thrown  into  prison  or  exiled  to  Siberia,  and 
most  of  Russia  placed  under  martial  law;  all  this  after 
the  Tsar  in  October  had  recognized  the  civil  rights  of  the  in- 
dividual. 

The  Tsar  had  promised  the  Duma,  which  was  to  be  a 
law-making  body   and  was  to  have   a  supervision   over  the 
actions    of   officials.       But   before   it   met   he    proceeded    to 
clip  its  wings.      He  issued  a  decree  constituting  the  Council  The 
of  the  Empire,  that  is,  a  body  consisting  largely  of  official  Council 
appointees  from  the  bureaucracy,  or  of  persons  associated  jjj^pire 
with  the  old  order  of  things,  as  a  kind  of  Upper  Chamber 
of  the  legislature,  of  which  the  Duma  should  be  the  Lower. 
An  elective  element  was  to  be  introduced  into  the  Council 
of  the  Empire.     Laws  must  have  the  consent  of  both  Council 
and  Duma  before  being  submitted  to  the  Tsar  for  approval. 

The  elections  to  the  Duma  were  held  in  March  and  April 
1906,  and  resulted  in  a  large  majority  for  the  Constitu- 
tional Democrats,  popularly  called  the  "  Cadets,"  a  name 
derived  from  the  initial  letters  of  the  name  of  the  party. 
Count  Witte  now  resigned  and  was  succeeded  by  Goremykin, 
whose  first  act  was  to  issue  in  the  name  of  the  Tsar  certani  »  Qj-gamc 
"  organic  laws,"  laws  that  could  not  be  touched  by  the  Duma,  laws." 

Thus  the  powers  of  that  body  were  again  restricted,  before 

^  ^  o  Opening 

it  had  even  met.  ^^  ^j^g 

The  Duma  was   opened  by   Nicholas   II   in   person   with  Duma.  May 

elaborate  ceremony,  May  10,  1906.     It  was  destined  to  have  10,  1906. 


714       RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


Demands 
of  the 
Duma. 


The 

impotence 
of  the 
Duma. 


a  short  and  stormy  life.  It  showed  from  the  beginning 
that  it  desired  a  thoroughgoing  reform  of  Russia  along 
the  well-known  lines  of  western  liberalism.  It  was  com- 
bated by  the  court  and  bureaucratic  parties,  which  had  not 
been  able  to  prevent  its  meeting,  but  which  were  bent  upon 
rendering  it  powerless,  and  were  only  waiting  for  a  favorable 
time  to  secure  its  abolition.  It  demanded  an  amnesty  for 
all  political  offenders.  "  The  first  thought  at  the  first 
assembly  of  the  representatives  of  the  Russian  nation  should 
be  for  those  who  have  sacrificed  their  freedom  for  their 
country,"  said  one  orator.  It  was  only  able,  however,  to 
secure  a  partial  amnesty.  It  demanded  that  the  Council 
of  the  Empire,  the  second  chamber,  should  be  reformed, 
as  it  was  under  the  complete  control  of  the  Emperor,  and 
was  thus  able  to  nullify  the  work  of  the  people's  chamber. 
It  demanded  that  the  ministers  be  made  responsible  to  the 
Duma  as  the  only  way  of  giving  the  people  control  over 
the  officials.  It  demanded  the  abolition  of  martial  law 
throughout  the  Empire,  under  cover  of  which  all  kinds  of 
crimes  were  being  perpetrated  by  the  governing  classes.  It 
passed  a  bill  abolishing  capital  punishment.  As  the  needs 
of  the  peasants  were  most  pressing,  it  demanded  that  the 
lands  belonging  to  the  state,  the  crown,  and  the  monasteries 
be  given  to  them  on  long  leases. 

The  Duma  lasted  a  little  over  two  months.  Its  debates 
■were  marked  by  a  high  degree  of  intelligence  and  by  fre- 
quent displays  of  eloquence,  in  wliich  several  peasants  dis- 
tinguished themselves.  It  criticised  the  abuses  of  the  Gov- 
ernment freely  and  scathingly.  Its  sessions  were  often 
stormy,  the  attitude  of  the  ministers  frequently  contemp- 
tuous. It  was  foiled  in  all  its  attempts  at  reform  by  the 
Council  of  the  Empire,  and  by  the  Tsar. 

The  crucial  contest  was  over  the  responsibility  of  min- 
isters. The  Duma  demanded  this  as  the  onlj^  way  of  giving 
the  people  an  effective  participation  in  the  government. 
The  Tsar  steadily  refused.     A  deadlock  ensued.     The  public 


THE  DISSOLUTION  OF  THE  DUMA         715 

was    inflamed    and    disorders    were   rife    among    the    people. 
A    radical    party    among    the    peasants    demanded    that    all 
the  land  of  the  country  be  given  to  them  outright,  without 
payment.       The  Tsar  cut  the  whole  matter  short  by   dis-  The  Duma 
solving  the  Duma,  on  July  22,  1906,  stating  that  he  was  dissolved. 
"  cruelly    disappointed "    that    "  the   representatives    of   the 
nation,  instead  of  applying  themselves  to  productive  legis- 
lation, had  strayed  into  spheres  beyond  their  competence, 
had  inquired  into  the  acts   of  local   authorities   established 
by  himself,  and  had  commented  upon  the  imperfections  of 
the  fundamental  laws,  which  could  only  be  modified  by  his 
Imperial   will."       March    5,    1907,   was    fixed    as    the    date  Stolypin 
for  the  meeting  of  a  new  Duma.     Stolypin  was  appointed  ^J^°j"  ^ 
prime  minister  in  the   place   of  Goremykin.     Many   of  the  minister, 
members  of  the  Duma  went  to  Viborg  in  Finland,  where  they 
issued  a  manifesto,  signed  by  230  of  them,  protesting  against 

the  dissolution  of  the  Duma,  and  calhng  upon  the  people  ^^^  Viborg 

-,-,         '   1  ,       n  1  Manifesto. 

"  to  stand  up  for  the  downtrodden  rights  or  popular  repre- 
sentation," and  to  give  the  Government  neither  soldiers  nor 
money,  as  it  had  no  right  to  either  without  the  consent  of  the 
people's  representatives.  They  declared  invalid  all  new  loans 
that  might  be  contracted  without  the  approval  of  the  Duma. 
As  the  people  remained  inactive,  either  because  of  indifference 
or  because  terrorized,  the  manifesto  proved  a  mere  flash 
in  the  pan.  Most  of  those  who  signed  it  were  prosecuted 
later,  and  were  provisionally  disfranchised  and  prevented 
from  being  elected  to  the  second  Duma. 

The  second  Duma  was  opened  by  the  Tsar  March  5,  1907.  The  second 
It  did  not  work  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Government.  "^^^' 
Friction  between  it  and  the  ministry  developed  early  and 
Increased  steadily.  Finally  the  Government  arrested  sixteen 
of  the  members  and  indicted  many  others  for  carrying  on 
an  alleged  revolutionary  propaganda.  This  was,  of  course, 
a  vital  assault  upon  the  Integrity  of  the  assembly,  a  gross 
infringement  upon  even  the  most  moderate  constitutional 
liberties.       Preparing   to   contest   this   high-handed   action, 


116       RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 


The  Tsar 
alters  the 
electoral 
system. 


The  third 
Duma. 


The 

autocracy 
asserts  its 
supreme 
authority. 


the  Duma  was  dissolved  on  June  16,  190T,  and  a  new  one 
ordered-  to  be  elected  in  September,  and  to  meet  in  No- 
vember. An  imperial  manifesto  was  issued  at  the  same 
time  altering  the  electoral  law  in  most  sweeping  fashion, 
and  practically  bestowing  the  right  of  choosing  the  large 
majority  of  the  members  upon  about  130,000  landowners. 
This  also  was  a  grave  infringement  upon  the  constitutional 
liberties  hitherto  granted,  which  had,  among  other  things, 
promised  that  the  electoral  law  should  not  be  changed  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  Duma.  The  Tsar  asserted  now  that 
"  the  right  of  abrogating  the  law  and  replacing  it  by  a 
new  law  belongs  only  to  the  power  which  gave  the  first 
electoral  law — the  historic  power  of  the  Tsar  of  Russia." 

The  third  Duma,  thus  chosen  on  a  very  limited  and  pluto- 
cratic suffrage,  was  opened  on  November  14,  1907,  and  is 
still  in  existence  (1909).  Though  composed  in  large  measure 
of  reactionaries  and  those  who  were  only  mildly  progress- 
ive, nevertheless,  this  assembly,  which  Stolypin  apparently 
thought  would  be  a  docile  instrument  for  the  ministry,  has 
not  entirely  justified  his  expectations.  An  act  of  some 
significance  was  its  refusal  by  a  vote  of  212  to  146  to 
introduce  the  word  "  autocracy  "  into  the  address  to  the 
Tsar.  Stolj^pin  thereupon  announced  that  the  autocracy 
was  the  supreme  power  in  the  state,  and  would  assert  itself 
whenever  the  safety  of  Russia  should  demand  it. 

Thus  the  autocracy  proclaimed  anew  its  undiminished 
authority.  Nevertheless,  it  has  not  yet  dared  to  abolish 
the  Duma  outright,  as  urged  to  by  the  reactionaries.  The 
Duma  still  exists,  but  is  rather  a  consultative  than  a  legis- 
lative body.  With  the  mere  passage  of  time  it  takes  on 
more  and  more  the  character  of  a  permanent  institution, 
exerting  a  feeble  influence  on  Russian  affairs.  However 
precarious  its  existence,  however  slight  its  power,  it  never- 
theless represents  an  experiment  in  constitutional  govern- 
ment from  the  effects  of  which  Russia  will  never  be  able  to 
shake  herself  permanently  free.      The  difficulty  of  cutting 


RUSSIA  AND  FINLAND  717 

this  experiment  short,  of  abolishing  the  institution  outright, 
has  been  increased  by  the  trend  of  events  outside  Russia, 
with  Turkey,  Persia,  and  China  becoming,  or  preparing  to  be- 
come, constitutional  states  of  the  modern  type.  A  decent 
regard  for  the  opinions  of  mankind  will  tend  to  thwart  a 
complete  or  permanent  reversion  to  outlived  forms  of  gov- 
ernment. 

Far  the  most  important  measure  sanctioned  by  the  third  The  trans- 
Duma  was  the  law  passed  early  in  1909  providing  for  the  '"'^"i^.tion 
ultimate  break-up  of  the  historic  form  of  the  village  com-  ^^^j. 
mune,  or  mir,  the  freeing  of  the  peasants  from  the  previous 
authority  of  the  mir,  the  substitution  of  individual  owner- 
ship of  the  land  for  the  collective  ownership,  hitherto  the 
chief  and  unique  characteristic  of  the  commune.  This  is 
a  great  agrarian  reform,  destined  inevitably  to  have  mo- 
mentous consequences,  though  whether  on  the  whole  bene- 
ficial or  disastrous  it  is  impossible  to  foresee.  The  idea 
at  the  basis  of  the  bill,  which  has  received  the  sanction 
of  the  Tsar,  was  first  brought  forward  by  Count  Witte, 
was  later  taken  up  by  Stolypin  and  promulgated  in  the 
form  of  provisional  decrees  by  the  Emperor.  The  bill 
represents  the  will  of  the  Government,  not  a  concession 
wrung  from  it  by  the  Duma.  The  Duma  has  merely  con- 
sented. 

Meanwhile,  Finland  fared  better  than  Russia.     The  at-  The 
tacks    upon   the   historic    institutions    and    liberties    of    the  restoration 
Finns,  the  attempted  Russification  of  the  duchy,  have  been  ...     ,.       . 
described.       The   Finns,    helpless    before   the    overwhelming  Finland, 
power  of  the  Russian  autocrat,  were  to  find  advantage  in 
his  discomfiture  at  the  hands  of  the  Japanese.      Roused  by 
the  anarchy  and  impotence  of  the  Government  in  1905,  they 
demanded  vehemently  the   restoration  of  the  constitutional 
rights  of  their  country,  and  to  this  end  ordered  a  general 
strike.     On  November  4,  1905,  the  Tsar  capitulated,  issu- 
ing a  decree  which  granted  the  demands  of  the  Finns  and 
annulled  the  whole  series  of  despotic  measures  enacted  from 


718       RUSSIA  SINCE  THE  WAR  WITH  JAPAN 

1899  to  1903.  Finland  was  once  more  a  free  country,  in  the 
possession  of  a  responsible  government  of  her  own.  No 
sooner  had  the  Finns  recovered  their  rights  and  power  than 
they  proceeded  to  reform  their  government  along  demo- 
cratic lines.  A  bill  was  passed  in  May  1906,  sanctioned  by 
The  Finnish  the  Tsar,  altering  the  sj'stem  of  representation.      In  the  place 

parliament     q£  ^^le  previous  four  Chambers,  or  Estates,  there  was  hence- 
altered.  ^  . 

forth  to  be  a  single  Chamber  of  two  hundred  members,  of 

whom  sixty  were  to  form  a  Grand  Committee,  with  certain 
powers  to  prevent  hasty  legislation.  Universal  suffrage  was 
established ;  women,  as  well  as  men,  who  have  reached  their 
twenty-fourth  year,  were  given  the  right  to  vote,  and  were 
declared  eligible  for  membership  in  the  Chamber.  Propor- 
tional representation  was  also  instituted. 

The  first  elections  to  the  new  Chamber  took  place  in 
April  1907.  Eighty  Soci^ists  were  returned  out  of  the 
two  hundred  members,  and  nineteen  women  were  chosen  mem- 
bers, of  whom  one  was  a  journalist,  one  a  school-teacher, 
one  a  dressmaker,  one  a  weaver,  one  an  agitator  for 
woman's  rights,  one  the  president  of  the  Seiwant  Girls' 
Union.  Thus,  for  the  first  time  in  history,  certain  social 
classes,  hitherto  without  political  power,  are  directly  repre- 
sented in  a  European  parliament.  In  the  elections  of  1908 
the  number  of  women  absentees  from  the  polls  was  consider- 
ably less  than  that  of  men  absentees. 
Renewed  Troublous  times  began  again  for  Finland  in  1908.     The 

troubles  in  question  of  the  powers  of  the  Finnish  Diet,  of  the  relations  of 
Finland.  ^^^  Grand  Duchy  to  the  Empire  as  a  whole  was  raised  once 
more  and  rapidly  became  acute.  The  Russian  Government 
was  resolved  to  bring  Finland  under  close  control  in  military 
and  financial  affairs,  on  the  ground  that  she  did  not  bear  her 
share  of  the  burdens  of  the  State  and  that  uniformity  of 
legislation  was  necessary  in  matters  so  vital.  The  Finns 
planted  themselves  firmly  upon  their  constitutional  rights, 
and  were  unconciliatory.  Toward  the  end  of  1909  the 
autonomy  of  their  country  seemed  to  be  drawing  to  its  close. 


CHAPTER  XXXII 
CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

It  is  impossible  within  the  limits  of  a  single  volume  to 
present  an  adequate  record  of  the  nineteenth  century,  in  all 
its  rich  complexity.  Many  aspects  of  its  history,  in  them- 
selves of  the  first  importance,  must  be  ignored  or  dismissed 
with  a  mere  allusion.  It  was  a  century  of  revolution — revo- 
lution in  government,  revolution  in  the  material  conditions 
and  circumstances  of  life,  revolution  in  knowledge  and  in 
mental  outlook.  We  have  been  concerned  chiefly  with  the 
record  of  its  political  and  social  changes.  But  in  every  sphere 
of  endeavor  the  militant  human  spirit  expressed  its  power. 
It  was  a  century  that  must  remain  memorable  by  reason 
of  the  originality,  the  brilliancy,  and  the  solidity  of  its 
achievements.  To  appraise  definitively  its  significance  is, 
of  course,  impossible.  To  feel  the  fulness  of  its  power  one 
must  study  it  from  many  points  of  view,  must  contemplate 
it  from  many  angles,  an  undertaking  from  which  we  are 
precluded  here. 

It  was  a  century  of  literature,  copious,  various  in  form  Literature, 
and  content,  diverse  in  its  eff'ects.  Literature  was  a  mirror 
of  a  stormy,  changeful  period  and  a  dynamic  force  in  the 
political,  social,  religious,  and  intellectual  struggles  of  the 
age,  for  it  was  not  its  own  excuse  for  being,  but  must  serve 
some  cause,  must  advance  some  propaganda.  That  the  in- 
fluence of  literature  upon  events  and  of  events  upon  literature 
has  been  varied  and  profoundly  significant,  the  history  of 
the  great  movements  of  the  age,  nationalistic,  imperialistic, 
democratic,  humanitarian,  abundantly  proves. 

Not  only  was  it  a  century  of  literature  but  it  was  a  cen- 

719 


720  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

Husic.  tury    of    music.      "  Music,"    says    an    accomplished    critic, 

"  is  the  only  one  of  the  fine  arts  of  which  it  can 
be  said  that  it  reached  its  highest  development  in  the 
nineteenth  century.  ...  It  is  the  modem  art  par 
excellence."  ^ 

It  was  a  century  in  wliich  the  kindlier  feelings  of  men 
gained  a  genial  efflorescence,  shown  in  their  increasing  desire 
to  alleviate  suffering  and  distress,  their  growing  sensitiveness 
to  cruelty  and  injustice,  the  disposition  more  and  more  preva- 
lent to  aid  the  unfortunate,  the  defective,  the  stricken ;  to 
the  strength  of  which  emotion  the  hospitals,  asylums,  schools, 
retreats,  and  various  relief  services  of  every  city  and  state 
bear  vivid  testimony,  as  docs  also  much  of  the  humanitarian 
legislation  previously  described.  This  tendency  became  stead- 
ily more  pronounced  as  the  century  wore  to  its  close  and 
passed  over  into  the  new. 

It  was  a  supremely  brilliant  century  of  science.  In  physics, 
in  chemistry,  in  astronomy,  in  geology,  in  biology,  in  the 
various  historical,  legal,  political,  and  social  studies,  in  phi- 
losophy, in  philology,  in  the  critical  study  of  literature 
and  art,  in  every  branch  of  investigation,  the  activity  was 

Science.  unremitting,  the  cumulative  result  revolutionary  and  stu- 
pendous. Not  only  were  the  confines  of  knowledge  greatly 
widened,  but  the  methods  of  its  acquisition  and  dissemination 
were  multiplied  and  perfected.  The  work  was  international 
in  character,  the  product  of  many  minds,  of  many  labora- 
tories. That  the  well-being  of  men  was  vastly  furthered 
by  it  all  is  most  obvious.  It  would  be  impossible,  for  in- 
stance, to  exaggerate  the  relief  from  fearful  suffering,  the 
gain  to  human  life,  brought  about  by  the  two  discoveries 
of  anesthetics  and  antiseptics,  products  of  the  scientific 
investigations  of  the  century.  In  two  respects,  which  have 
a  closer  connection  with  the  general  character  of  this  volume, 
it  is   desirable  to  show  how  science  has   revolutionized   the 

^  H.  T.  Finck  in  The  Nineteenth  Century,  "  A  Review  of  Progress," 
239-240. 


THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  INDUSTRY    721 

material  conditions   of  life,  by   its   application  to  industry 
and  to  war. 

The  transformation  of  industry  and  commerce  accom- 
plished in  the  century  is  unique  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
a  transformation  so  sweeping  that  in  this  respect  the  present 
age  differs  more  from  that  of  Louis  XVIII  than  did  his  from 
that  of  Rameses  II.  This  transformation  has  been  the 
result  of  a  series  of  discoveries  and  inventions  too  numerous 
even  to  mention.  Among  these,  one  stands  pre-eminent,  the 
placing  at  the  disposition  of  man  of  a  new  motive  force  of 
incomparable  consequence,  steam,  rendered  available  by  the 
perfection  of  an  engine  for  the  transmission  of  its  power. 
James  Watt  rendered  this  service  to  the  race  at  the  close 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  but  it  was  not  until  the  nineteenth 
was  well  advanced  that  its  possibilities,  the  vast  range  of  its 
utility,  were  clearly  established. 

Consider  the  significance  of  the  new  agency.  Up  to  the 
advent  of  the  age  of  steam,  industry  and  commerce  were 
essentially  what  they  had  been  for  many  centuries.  Pre-  of  steam, 
viously  the  only  motive  force  had  come  from  animal  strength, 
and  from  wind  and  falling  water.  Mankind  had  very  few 
machines,  but  manufacture  was  literally  production  by  hand, 
and  was  carried  on  in  small  shops  generally  connected  with 
the  home  of  the  manufacturer.  There,  in  the  midst  of  a 
few  workmen,  the  proprietor  himself  worked.  The  imple- 
ments were  few,  the  relations  of  master  and  journeyman 
and  apprentice  intimate  and  constant,  the  differences  of  their 
conditions  comparatively  slight.  Industry  was  truly  do- 
mestic. In  general  each  town  produced  the  commodities 
which  it  required.  Production  was  on  a  small  scale,  and  was 
designed  largely  for  the  local  market.  Necessarily  so,  for 
the  difficulty  of  communication  restricted  commerce.  Down 
to  the  nineteenth  century  men  traveled  and  goods  were 
carried  in  the  way  with  which  the  world  had  been  familiar 
since  time  began.  Only  by  horse  or  by  boat  could  merchandise 
be  conveyed.     Roads  were  few  in  number,  poor  in  quality, 


722  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

brido'cs  were  woefully  infrequent,  so  that  traveler  and  cart 
were  stopped  by  rivers,  over  which  they  were  carried  slowly, 
and  often  with  danger,  by  boats  or  ferries.  Practically  no 
great  improvement  had  been  made  in  locomotion  since  the 
earliest  times,  save  in  the  betterment  of  roadbeds  and  the 
establishment  of  regular  stage  routes.  Napoleon,  fleeing 
from  Russia  in  1812,  and  anxious  to  reach  Paris  as  quickly 
as  possible,  left  the  army,  and  with  a  traveling  and  sleeping 
carriage  and  constant  relays  of  fresh  horses,  succeeded,  by 
extraordinary  efforts  day  and  night,  in  covering  a  thousand 
miles  in  five  days,  which  was  an  average  rate  of  eight  or 
nine  miles  an  hour,  a  remarkable  ride  for  an  age  of  horse 
conveyance.  Where  the  Emperor  of  the  French,  command- 
ing all  the  resources  of  his  time,  could  do  no  better,  of  course 
the  average  traveler  moved  much  more  slowly  and  merchan- 
dise more  slowly  still. 

The  transmission  of  information  could  not  be  more  rapid 
than  the  means  of  locomotion.  The  postal  service  was  primi- 
tive, postage  was  high  and  very  variable,  and  was  paid  by 
the  receiver.  In  France,  since  1793,  there  was  a  kind  of 
aerial  telegraph  which,  by  means  of  signals,  operated  from 
the  tops  of  poles,  like  those  along  the  lines  of  modem  rail- 
roads, could  transmit  intelligence  from  Paris  to  other  cities 
rapidly.  But  this  invention  was  monopolized  by  the  State, 
and  moreover  ceased  to  operate  when  darkness  or  rain 
came  on. 
Hise  of  the        Into  this  world  of  small  industries  and  limited  commerce 

factory  came  the  revolutionary  steam  engine,  destined  to  effect  an 

system.  .  f  . 

economic  transformation  unparalleled  in  the  history  of  the 

race.  It  was  applied  to  industry,  then  to  commerce.  First 
employed  in  mining,  it  was  shortl}'  adopted  by  the  manu- 
facturers of  cotton  and  woolen  goods,  to  give  the  force  for 
the  inventions  of  Crompton  and  Arkwright  and  Hargreaves 
and  Cartwright.  Out  of  it  the  modern  factory  system  of 
production  arose,  and  it  became  the  throbbing  heart  of  every 
industry.     The  machine  superseded  the  hand  of  man  as  the 


IMPROVED  METHODS  OF  COMMUNICATION    723 

chief  element  in  production,  increasing  the  output  ultimately 
in  certain  lines  a  hundred,  even  a  thousand-fold.  Domestic 
industry  waned  and  disappeared.  Manufacturing  became 
concentrated  in  large  establishments  employing  hundreds  of 
men,  and  ultimately  thousands.  And  this  concentration  of 
industry  caused  the  rapid  growth  of  cities,  one  of  the  char- 
acteristic features  of  the  century. 

But  there  was  a  limit  imposed  upon  the  utility  of  the 
steam  engine  in  industry.  Production  on  the  large  scale 
involved  necessarily  two  other  factors — larger  sources  of 
supply  from  which  to  draw  the  raw  materials,  larger  markets 
for  the  finished  products.  Right  here  the  inadequate  means  of 
communication  called  halt.  The  necessity  for  improvement 
was  imperative.  A  single  illustration  is  sufficient  evidence. 
The  port  of  Liverpool  and  the  great  manufacturing  city  of 
Manchester  were  separated  by  only  about  thirty  miles.  Three 
canals  connected  them,  yet  traffic  on  them  was  so  congested 
that  it  sometimes  took  a  month  for  cotton  to  reach  the 
factories  from  the  sea.^  The  new  machine  industry  was  in 
danger  of  strangulation.  Moreover  the  size  of  cities  was 
conditioned  upon  the  ability  to  procure  food  supplies,  an 
ability  strictly  limited  by  the  existing  methods  of  communica- 
tion. 

The  steam  engine,  applied  to  locomotion,  came  to  the  Steam 
rescue  of  the  steam  engine  applied  to  looms  and  spindles.  ^^^^^ 
And  first  to  locomotion  on  water.  Fulton's  steamboat,  the 
Clermont,  leaving  New  York  August  7,  1807,  arrived  at 
Albany,  a  hundred  and  fifty  miles  distant,  in  thirty-two 
hours.  The  practicability  of  steam  navigation  was  thus, 
after  much  experimenting,  definitively  established.  But  steam 
navigation  only  slowly  eclipsed  navigation  by  sail.  In  1814! 
there  were  only  two  steamers,  with  a  tonnage  of  426  tons,  in 
the  whole  British  Empire.  In  1816,  Liverpool,  which  now 
has  the  largest  steam  fleet  in  existence,  did  not  have  a  single 
steamer.  It  is  impossible  here  to  trace  the  growth  of  this 
'  Day,  A  History  of  Commerce,  296. 


724-    CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 


The  Great 
Western. 


The 

invention 
of  the 
railroad. 


method  of  locomotion.  Its  expansion  was  reasonably  rapid. 
It  was  at  first  thought  impossible  to  construct  ships  large 
enough  to  carry  sufficient  coal  for  long  voyages.  It  was  not 
until  1838  that  a  ship  relying  solely  upon  steam  propulsion 
crossed  the  Atlantic  Ocean.  The  Great  Western,  a  British 
vessel,  sailed  from  Bristol  to  New  York  in  fifteen  days,  to  the 
discomfiture  of  those  who  were  at  that  very  time  showing  the 
impossibility  of  such  a  feat.  "  It  was  proved  by  fluxionary 
calculus,"  wrote  Carlyle,  "  that  steamers  could  never  get 
across  from  the  farthest  point  of  Ireland  to  the  nearest  of 
Newfoundland ;  impelling  force,  resisting  force,  maximum 
here,  minimum  there;  by  law  of  nature,  and  geometric  dem- 
onstration;— what  could  be  done.?  The  Great  Western 
could  weigh  anchor  from  Bristol  Port ;  that  could  be  done. 
The  Great  Western,  bounding  safe  through  the  gullets  of 
the  Hudson,  threw  her  cable  out  on  the  capstan  of  New 
York,  and  left  our  still  moist  paper  demonstration  to  dry 
itself  at  leisure."  The  experimental  stage  was  over.  In 
1840,  Samuel  Cunard,  a  native  of  Nova  Scotia,  living  in 
England,  founded  the  first  regular  transatlantic  steamship 
line,  thus  raising  his  name  out  of  obscurity  forever.  In  1847 
the  Hamburg-American,  in  1857  the  North  German  Lloyd, 
in  1862  the  French  lines  began  their  notable  careers,  the 
two  former  now  constituting  veritable  fleets  and  serving  all 
parts  of  the  globe. 

But  more  important  still  was  the  application  of  steam  to 
locomotion  on  land,  the  invention  of  the  railroad.  This,  like 
most  inventions,  was  a  slow  growth.  In  the  mines  and 
quarries  of  England  carts  had  for  some  time  been  drawn 
on  rails  made  at  first  of  wood,  later  of  iron.  It  was  found 
that  horses  could  thus  draw  much  heavier  loads,  the  friction 
of  the  wheel  being  reduced.  The  next  step  was  to  substitute 
the  steam  engine  for  the  horse.  Several  men  were  studying 
this  problem  in  the  early  nineteenth  century.  William  Hedley, 
chief  engineer  of  a  colliery  near  Newcastle,  constructed  in 
1813  a  locomotive,  Piiffing  Billy,  which  worked  fairly  well. 


THE  INVENTION  OF  THE  RAILROAD       725 

The  significance  of  George  Stephenson  lies  in  the  fact  that 
by  his  inventions  and  improvements,  extending  through  many 
years  he  made  it  "  actually  cheaper,"  to  use  his  own  words, 
"  for  the  poor  man  to  go  by  steam  than  to  walk."  His  first 
locomotive,  constructed  in  1814,  proved  capable  of  hauling 
coal  at  the  rate  of  three  miles  an  hour  but  at  such  a  rate 
was  not  commercially  valuable.  He  perfected  his  machine  by 
increasing  the  power  of  the  boiler  so  that  the  Rocket  was 
able  to  make  thirty  miles  an  hour  at  the  opening  of  the 
Liverpool  and  Manchester  railway  in  1830,  The  experi- 
mental stage  was  over.  The  railway  was  a  proved  success. 
Construction  began  forthwith  and  has  continued  ever  since. 
The  development  of  the  new  means  of  locomotion  has  pro- 
ceeded with  the  development  of  chemistry,  metallurgy,  me- 
chanics, engineering,  electricity.  Rails  have  been  constantly 
improved,  locomotives  augmented  in  drawing  power,  bridges 
flung  over  rivers  and  ravines,  tunnels  cut  through  moun- 
tains. Navigation,  too,  has  had  its  record  of  triumph. 
Steamships,  plying  regularly  and  in  all  directions,  have 
become  larger  and  larger,  swifter  and  swifter,  more  and 
more  numerous.  Traveling  and  transportation  have  thus 
been  revolutionized  by  methods  entirely  dissimilar  from 
those  in  existence  during  all  the  previous  history  of  man- 
kind. They  represent  not  a  difference  of  degree,  but  of 
kind. 

It  is  railways  that  have  rendered  possible  the  remarkable  Importance 
economic  transformation  of  the  world,  which  must  otherwise 
have  been  checked  in  mid-process.  They  have  also  aided  in 
the  work  of  nation-building,  of  empire-building,  and  have 
facilitated  political  concentration.  They  have  become  power° 
ful  auxiliaries  in  war.  "  The  lack,"  says  President  Hadley, 
"  of  a  few  miles  of  railroad  connection  in  1859  probably 
caused  Austria  to  lose  the  battles  of  Solferino  and  Magenta, 
and  changed  the  whole  destiny  of  Italy.  The  energetic  con- 
trol and  use  of  every  railroad  line  in  1870  enabled  Germany  to 
put  her  troops  where  they  were  most  needed,  and  strike  those 


726  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

telling  blows  which  virtually  decided  the  contest  in  a  few 
days."  ^ 

Another  agency  has  co-operated  with  steam  in  the  trans- 
formation of  the  conditions  of  modern  industry  and  com- 
Electricity.  merce,  electricity.  It  has  become,  within  very  recent  years, 
the  source  of  light  and  heat  and  motive  power.  But  the 
marvelous  service  it  has  thus  far  rendered  has  been  the 
instantaneous  transmission  of  intelligence  by  the  telegraph, 
which  became  practicable  after  1835,  and  by  the  telephone, 
invented  much  later  by  Alexander  Graham  Bell  (1876),  only 
several  years  later  still  to  become  commercially  valuable. 
Within  the  last  twenty  years  the  application  of  this  new 
agency  to  life  has  made  gigantic  strides. 

The  result  of  all  this  development,  of  the  railroads,  render- 
ing possible  the  extraordinary  expansion  of  industry,  of  in- 
dustrial inventions,  rendering  possible  the  extraordinary  ex- 
pansion of  the  railroads — for  the  latter  are  both  cause  and 
effect — and  of  this  instantaneous  transmission  of  intelligence 
by  wire  and  cable,  and  its  publication  by  the  marvelously  im- 
proved printing  presses  of  our  day,  is  the  modem  world  of 
business  which  affects  constantly  and  intimately  the  life  of 
every  man,  the  activity  of  every  government.  Humanity 
occupies  a  stronger  position  than  ever  before.  Its  increased 
knowledge  and  control  of  the  forces  of  nature  have  en- 
abled it  to  produce  in  immensely  greater  quantities  the 
necessities  and  comforts  and  luxuries  of  life.  The  applica- 
tion of  machinery  to  production,  in  agriculture,  in  manu- 
Standard  facture,  in  transportation,  has  increased  vastly  the  quan- 
0  ivmg,  |.-^y  g^j^j  reduced  the  price  of  most  commodities.  j\Iany 
products  which  only  the  well-to-do  could  formerly  enjoy  are 
now  within  the  reach  of  the  millions.  The  plane  of  living 
has  been  distinctly  raised.  The  higher  standard  begets  a 
desire  for  a  standard  higher  still. 

But  while  general  wealth  has  advanced,  and  is  advancing 
with  enormous  strides,  and  while  all  have  shared  in  the  pro- 
^  Hadley,  Railroad  Transportation,  15. 


PRESENT  SOCIAL  PROBLEMS  727 

digious  material  progress,  there  is  indubitably  a  growing 
feeling  that  the  distribution  of  the  benefits  has  been  and  is 
far  from  equitable  and  healthy,  that  the  world's  manual 
laborers  have  not  gained  from  these  improved  methods  of 
production  as  much  as,  in  the  interests  of  society  as  a  whole, 
they  should  have  gained.  There  is  an  increasing  conviction 
in  men's  minds,  to  which  the  history  of  the  last  thirty  or 
forty  years  bears  cumulative  witness  on  every  page,  that, 
given  man's  unexampled  power  over  creative  forces  which 
formerly  went  to  waste,  poverty  has  no  place  in  the 
modern  world  save  as  the  doom  of  indolence  or  vice. 
Yet  poverty  abounds  which  cannot  be  justly  ascribed  to 
either. 

Out  of  this  conviction  and  out  of  the  disillusions  and 
sufferings  of  the  millions  who  have  flocked  to  the  cities, 
allured  by  higher  wages,  have  sprung  various  movements,  of 
which  socialism  is  but  one,  although  the  most  conspicuous  and 
the  most  potent.  And  discontent  now  possesses  powers  which  Popular 
it  has  never  previously  possessed.  For  the  masses  of  to-day  discontent, 
have  been  educated  in  the  public  schools,  whereas,  in  1815, 
they  could,  as  a  rule,  neither  read  nor  write ;  have  received  a 
discipline  in  armies  and  in  factories,  a  training  in  co- 
operation and  management  and  judgment  in  their  unions; 
have  newspapers  which  conduct  their  propaganda,  and  ex- 
press their  views ;  have  acquired  a  taste  for  politics,  which  at 
the  beginning  of  the  century  was  the  characteristic  of  a  small 
minority ;  and  exercise  an  increasing  power  in  most  states  as 
they  possess  the  suffrage. 

The  supreme  result  of  the  economic  and  the  democratic 
evolution  of  the  century  in  the  domain  of  politics  is  the 
sharpening  concentration  of  the  thought  of  our  day  upon 
the  social  and  economic  problems  to  which  it  itself  has  given 
rise.  For,  more  and  more  penetrating  into  the  foreground 
of  the  consciousness  of  every  nation,  is  the  condition  of  the 
most  numerous  class  and  the  duty  of  society  to  improve  it. 
Social  amelioration  is  one  of  the  insistent  questions  of  the 


728  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 


Spread  of 
militarism. 


twentieth  century,  a  question  which  will  be  answered,  if  at  all, 
by  democracy,  the  product  of  the  nineteenth. 

There  is  another  problem  created  by  the  advance  of  science 
which  engrosses  more  and  more  the  attention  of  thoughtful 
men.  The  rise  and  development  of  the  militaristic  spirit  have 
been  shown  in  the  preceding  pages.  The  Prussian  military 
system,  marked  by  scientific  thoroughness  and  efficiency,  has 
been  adopted  by  all  the  countries  of  Europe.  Europe  is  to-day 
what  she  has  never  been  before,  literally  an  armed  continent. 
The  burden  is  heavy  and  its  weight  increases  with  every  ad- 
vance of  science.  For  every  discovery  of  a  new  explosive, 
every  improvement  in  weapons  is  immediately  adopted, 
regardless  of  expense.  Thus  old  equipment  becomes  obsolete 
before  it  has  ever  been  used  in  actual  war.  The  rivalry  of  the 
nations  to  have  the  most  perfect  instruments  of  destruction, 
the  strongest  army  and  the  strongest  navy,  is  one  of  the 
most  conspicuous  features  of  the  Avorld  to-day.  Ships  of 
war  were  made  so  strong  that  they  could  resist  attack. 
New  projectiles  of  terrific  force  were  consequently  required 
and  the  torpedo  was  invented.  A  new  agency  would  be  useful 
to  discharge  this  missile  and  thus  the  torpedo  boat  was  de- 
veloped. To  neutralize  it  was  therefore  the  immediate  neces- 
sity and  the  torpedo-boat  destroyer  was  the  result.  Boats 
that  could  navigate  beneath  the  waters  would  have  an  ob- 
vious advantage  over  those  that  could  be  seen,  and  the  sub- 
marine was  provided  for  this  need.  And  now  we  are  about 
to  take  possession  of  the  air  with  dirigible  balloons  and  aero- 
planes, as  aerial  auxiliaries  of  war.  And  thus  man's  imme- 
morial occupation,  war,  gains  from  the  advance  of  science 
and  contributes  to  that  advance.  The  wars  of  the  past  were 
fought  on  the  surface  of  the  globe.  Those  of  the  future 
will  be  fought  in  the  heavens  above,  and  in  the  earth  beneath, 
and  in  the  waters  under  the  earth. 

But  all  this  is  tremendously  expensive.     It  costs  more  than 
a  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  construct  the  largest  coast 
of  war,  defense  gun,  which  carries  twenty-one  miles,  and  its  single 


Cost  of 
modern 
instruments 


THE  BURDEN  OF  MILITARISM  729 

discharge  costs  a  thousand  dollars.  Ten  millions  are  nec- 
essary to  build  a  Dreadnought.  The  debts  of  European 
countries  have  been  nearly  doubled  during  the  last  thirty 
years,  largely  because  of  military  expenditures.  The  mil- 
itary budgets  of  European  states  in  this  day  of  "  armed 
peace  "  amount  to  not  far  from  a  billion  and  a  half  dollars  a 
year,  half  as  much  again  as  the  indemnity  exacted  by  Ger- 
many from  France  in  1871.  Peace  hath  her  price  no  less 
than  war.  The  burden  is  so  heavy,  the  rivalry  so  keen  that 
it  has  given  rise  to  a  movement  which  aims  to  end  it.  The 
very  aggravation  of  the  evil  prompts  a  desire  for  its  cure. 
In  the  summer  of  1898  the  civil  and  military  authorities 
of  Russia  were  considering  how  they  might  escape  the  neces- 
sity of  replacing  an  antiquated  kind  of  artillery  with  a 
more  modern  but  very  expensive  one.  Out  of  this  discussion 
emerged  the  idea  that  it  would  be  desirable,  if  possible,  to 
check  the  increase  of  armaments.  This  could  not  be  achieved 
by  one  nation  alone  but  must  be  done  by  all,  if  done  at  all. 
The  outcome  of  these  discussions  was  the  issuance  by  the  Nicholas  II 
Tsar,  Nicholas  II,  on  August  24,  1898,  of  a  communication  ijj^j4.a,tion 
to  those  nations  which  were  represented  by  diplomatic  agents  of 
at  the  Court  of  St.  Petersburg,  suggesting  that  an  interna- s^'^"^*'"^'^*^. 
tional  conference  be  held  to  consider  the  general  problem. 
This  paper  is  very  significant.  Some  of  its  statements  de- 
serve to  be  quoted :  "  In  the  course  of  the  last  twenty  years 
the  longings  for  a  general  appeasement  have  become  espe- 
cially pronounced  in  the  consciences  of  civilized  nations.  The 
preservation  of  peace  has  been  put  forward  as  the  object 
of  international  policy ;  in  its  name  great  states  have  con- 
cluded between  themselves  powerful  alliances ;  it  is  the  better 
to  guarantee  peace  that  they  have  developed,  in  proportions 
hitherto  unprecedented,  their  military  powers,  and  still  con- 
tinue to  increase  them  without  shrinking  from  any  sacrifice. 
All  these  efforts,  nevertheless,  have  not  yet  been 
able  to  bring  about  the  beneficent  results  of  the  desired 
pacification.     The  financial   charges,   following   an   upward 


730  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 


The 

First  Peace 

Conference 

at  the 

Hague. 


Address 
of  M.  de 
Staal. 


march,  strike  the  public  prosperity  at  its  very  source.  The 
intellectual  and  physical  strength  of  the  nations,  labor  and 
capital,  are  for  the  major  part  diverted  from  their  natural 
application,  and  unproductively  consumed.  Hundreds  of  mil- 
lions are  devoted  to  acquiring  terrible  engines  of  destruction 
which,  though  to-day  regarded  as  the  last  word  of  science, 
are  destined  to-morrow  to  lose  all  value,  in  consequence  of 
some  fresh  discovery  in  the  same  field.  National  culture,  eco- 
nomic progress,  and  the  production  of  wealth  are  either  para- 
lyzed or  checked  in  their  development.  ...  It  appears 
evident  then  that,  if  this  state  of  things  were  prolonged,  it 
would  inevitably  lead  to  the  very  cataclysm  which  it  is  de- 
signed to  avert,  and  the  horrors  of  which  make  every  think- 
ing man  shudder  in  advance." 

The  conference,  thus  suggested  by  the  Tsar,  was  held  at 
the  Hague  in  1899.  Twenty-six  of  the  fifty-nine  sovereign 
governments  of  the  world  were  represented  by  one  hundred 
members.  Twenty  of  these  states  were  European,  four  were 
Asiatic — China,  Japan,  Persia,  and  Siam, — and  two  were 
American — the  United  States  and  Mexico.  The  Conference 
was  opened  on  the  18th  of  May  and  closed  on  July  29th. 

That  the  problem  concerned  all  the  world,  that  Asia  and 
America  were  as  truly  involved  as  Europe,  that  the  day  of 
isolation  is  over,  when  a  nation  may  live  unto  itself,  was 
shown  in  the  address  of  the  President  of  the  Conference,  M.  de 
Staal,  a  Russian  delegate.  "  We  perceive  between  nations," 
said  he,  "  an  amount  of  material  and  moral  interests  which  is 
constantly  increasing.  The  ties  which  unite  all  parts  of  the 
human  family  are  ever  becoming  closer.  A  nation  could  not 
remain  isolated  if  it  wished.  ...  If,  therefore,  the  nations 
are  united  by  ties  so  multifarious,  is  there  no  room  for  seeking 
the  consequences  arising  from  this  fact.?  When  a  dispute 
arises  between  two  or  more  nations,  others,  without  being 
concerned  directly,  are  profoundly  affected.  The  conse- 
quences of  an  international  conflict  occurring  in  any  portion 
of  the  globe  are  felt  on  all  sides.     It  is  for  this  reason  that 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  PEACE  CONFERENCE    731 

outsiders  cannot  remain  indifferent  to  the  conflict — they  are 
bound  to  endeavor  to  appease  it  by  conciliatory  action." 
Among  the  means  suggested  are  mediation  and  arbitration. 
On  another  occasion  the  same  member  said :  "  The  forces  of 
human  activity  arc  absorbed  in  an  increasing  proportion  by 
the  expenses  of  the  military  and  naval  budgets.  .  .  .  Armed 
peace  to-day  causes  more  considerable  expense  than  the  most 
burdensome  war  of  modern  times,"  and  another  Russian 
delegate  exclaimed :  "  The  idea  of  the  Emperor  of  Russia 
is  grand  and  generous.  ...  If  not  this  first  Conference, 
it  will  be  a  future  Conference  which  will  accept  the  idea,  for 
it  responds  to  the  wants  of  all  nations." 

A  member  of  the  German  delegation.  General  von  Schwarz-  Address  of 
hoff,  however,  struck  the  opposite  note.  "  I  can  hardly  be-  General  von 
lieve  that  among  my  honored  colleagues  there  is  a  single 
one  ready  to  state  that  his  Sovereign,  his  Government,  is 
engaged  in  working  for  the  inevitable  ruin,  the  slow  but 
sure  annihilation  of  his  country.  ...  So  far  as  Ger- 
many is  concerned,  I  am  able  completely  to  reassure  her  friends 
and  to  relieve  all  well-meant  anxiety.  The  German  people 
is  not  crushed  under  the  weight  of  charges  and  taxes, — it 
is  not  hanging  on  the  brink  of  an  abyss  ;  it  is  not  approaching 
exhaustion  and  ruin.  Quite  the  contrary :  public  and  private 
wealth  is  increasing,  the  general  welfare  and  standard  of 
life  is  being  raised  from  one  year  to  another.  So  far  as 
compulsory  military  service  is  concerned,  which  is  so  closely 
connected  with  these  questions,  the  German  does  not  regard 
this  as  a  heavy  burden,  but  as  a  sacred  and  patriotic  duty 
to  which  he  owes  his  country's  existence,  its  prosperity,  and 
its  future." 

A  French  representative,  M.  Bourgeois,  replied  that  Gen-  Address 
eral  von  Schwarzhoff  "  will  surely  recognize  with  me  that,  of  M. 
if  in  his  country,  as  well  as  in  mine,  the  great  resources,  which  Bourgeois, 
are  now  devoted  to  military  organization,  could,  at  least  in 
part,  be  put  to  the  service  of  peaceful  and  productive  activity, 
the  grand  total  of  the  prosperity  of  each  country  would  not 


732  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 


cease  to  increase  at  an  even  more  rapid  rate."  .  .  .  And 
he  added:  "The  object  of  civilization  seems  to  us  to  be  to 
abolish,  more  and  more,  the  struggle  for  life  between  men, 
and  to  put  in  its  stead  an  accord  between  them  for  the 
struggle  against  the  unrelenting  forces  of  matter." 

The  great  military  powers  had  spoken.  The  feeling  of 
the  lesser  states  was  voiced  by  a  representative  of  Bulgaria 
who  declared  "  that  armed  peace  was  ruinous,  especially  for 
small  countries  whose  wants  were  enormous,  and  who  had 
everything  to  gain  by  using  their  resources  for  the  develop- 
ment of  industry,  agriculture,  and  general  progress."  ^ 

With  such  differences  of  opinion  the  conference  was  un- 
able to  reach  any  agreement  upon  the  fundamental  question 
which  had  given  rise  to  its  convocation.  It  could  only  adopt 
a  resolution  expressing  the  belief  that  "  a  limitation  of  the 
military  expenses  which  now  burden  the  world  is  greatly 
to  be  desired  in  the  interests  of  the  material  and  moral  well- 
being  of  mankind "  and  the  desire  that  the  governments 
"  shall  take  up  the  study  of  the  possibility  of  an  agreement 
concerning  the  limitation  of  armed  forces  on  land  and  sea, 
and  of  military  budgets." 

With  regard  to  arbitration  the  Conference  was  more  suc- 
cessful. It  established  a  Permanent  Court  of  Arbitration 
for  the  purpose  of  facilitating  arbitration  in  the  case  of 
Arbitration,  international  disputes  which  it  has  been  found  impossible  to 
settle  by  the  ordinary  means  of  diplomacy.  The  Court  does 
not  consist  of  a  group  of  judges  holding  sessions  at  stated 
times  to  try  such  cases  may  be  brought  before  it.  But  it 
is  provided  that  each  power  "  shall  select  not  more  than  four 
persons  of  recognized  competence  in  questions  of  international 
law,  enjoying  the  highest  moral  reputation  and  disposed  to 
accept  the  duties  of  arbitrators,"  and  that  their  appointment 
shall  run  for  six  years  and  may  be  renewed.  Out  of  this 
long  list  the  powers  at  variance  choose,  in  a  manner  indicated, 

*  Quotations   are   from    Holls,   The   Peace  Conference   at  the   Hague, 
Chapters  II  and  III  passim. 


Establish- 
ment of  a 
Permanent 
Court  of 


U- 


.  I     , 'J'es«'rt  J^Sf*.  vS-M^^    """U  V-r^-^awoSil         ;T,'~M'       /'(    -  ^\  QMtoi,"^;--'-'  iMK».'    Trobic    of  I 


A  PERMANENT  COURT  OF  ARBITRATION       733 

the  judges  who  shall  decide  any  given  case.  When  in  the 
discharge  of  their  duties,  such  judges  are  to  have  the  privi- 
leges and  immunities  enjoyed  by  diplomatic  agents. 

Recourse  to  this  Court  is  optional,  but  the  Court  is  always 
ready  to  be  invoked.  Arbitration  is  entirely  voluntary  with 
the  parties  to  a  quarrel,  but  if  they  wish  to  arbitrate,  the 
machinery  is  at  hand,  a  fact  which  is,  perhaps,  an  encourage- 
ment to  its  use. 

The  work  of  the  First  Peace  Conference  was  very  limited 
and  modest,  yet  encouraging.  But  that  the  new  century  was 
to  bring  not  peace  but  a  sword,  that  force  still  ruled  the 
world,  was  shortly  apparent.  Those  who  were  optimistic 
about  the  rapid  spread  of  arbitration  as  a  principle  destined 
to  regulate  the  international  relations  of  the  future  were 
sadly  disappointed  by  the  meager  results  of  the  Conference, 
and  were  still  more  depressed  by  subsequent  events. 

The  nineteenth  century  had  been  ushered  in  by  a  series  The 

of  wars  of  unexampled  magnitude  and  of  shattering  effect,  twentieth 

ccnturv 
The  twentieth  century  also  opened  with  conflicts  on  an  even  Q-g^g  ^^^jj 

vaster  scale,  involving  larger  armies,  and  likely  to  prove  of  wars, 
still  deeper  import.  The  very  location  of  the  theaters  of 
war  in  the  two  cases  exemplifies  admirably  the  changes  that 
have  come  over  the  world  during  a  hundred  years.  The 
wars  of  Napoleon  were  fought  in  the  very  heart  of  Europe. 
Those  of  the  opening  decade  of  the  twentieth  century  were 
fought  in  eastern  Asia  and  southern  Africa,  regions  that 
for  Napoleon,  whose  imagination,  however,  was  quite  lively, 
were  the  very  confines  of  the  world.  Russia  fought  in  Man- 
churia, England  fought  in  the  Transvaal,  five  thousand  miles 
and  more  from  the  base  of  supplies.  Distance  has  been  anni- 
hilated. Again,  both  wars  arose  largely  out  of  the  ambi- 
tions of  modern  commerce,  were  expressions  of  the  expansive, 
aggressive  character  of  modern  business,  the  relentless  pres- 
sure of  economic  interests  in  the  world  of  to-day,  of  what 
we  call,  in  short,  imperialism. 

During  this  decade,  also,  the  expenditures  of  European 


734<    CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  ISIODERN  PROGRESS 


The    Second 
Peace 
Conference 
at  the 
Hague. 


Work 
of  the 
Conference. 


states  upon  armies  and  navies  continued  to  increase,  and 
at  an  even  faster  rate  than  ever.  During  the  eight  years, 
from  1898  to  1906,  they  augmented  nearly  £70,000,000, 
the  sum  total  mounting  from  £250,000,000   to  £320,000,000. 

Such  was  tlie  disappointing  sequel  of  the  Hague  Confer- 
ence. But  despite  discouragements  the  friends  of  peace  were 
active,  and  finally  brought  about  the  Second  Conference  at 
the  Hague  in  1907.  This  also  was  called  by  Nicholas  II, 
though  President  Roosevelt  had  first  taken  the  initiative. 
The  Second  Conference  was  in  session  from  June  15th  to 
October  18th.  It  was  attended  by  representatives  from 
forty-four  of  the  world's  fifty-seven  states,  claiming  sov- 
ereignty in  1907.  The  number  of  countries  represented  in 
this  Conference,  therefore,  was  nearly  double  that  represented 
in  the  first,  and  the  number  of  members  was  more  than 
double,  mounting  from  one  hundred  to  two  hundred  and 
fifty-six.  The  chief  additions  came  from  the  republics  of 
Central  and  South  America.  The  number  of  American  gov- 
ernments represented  rose,  indeed,  from  two  to  nineteen. 
Twenty-one  European,  nineteen  American,  and  four  Asiatic 
states  sent  delegates  to  this  Second  Conference.  Its  member- 
ship illustrated  excellently  certain  features  of  our  day,  among 
others  the  indubitable  fact  that  we  live  in  an  age  of  world 
politics,  that  isolation  no  longer  exists,  either  of  nations  or 
of  hemispheres.  The  Conference  was  not  European  but  in- 
ternational,— the  majority  of  the  states  were  non-European. 

The  Second  Conference  accomplished  much  useful  work  in 
the  adoption  of  conventions  regulating  the  actual  conduct 
of  war  in  more  humane  fashion,  and  in  defining  certain 
aspects  of  international  law  with  greater  precision  than 
heretofore.  But,  concerning  compulsory  arbitration,  and 
concerning  disarmament  or  the  limitation  of  armaments, 
nothing  was  achieved.  It  passed  this  resolution :  "  The  Con- 
ference confirms  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  Conference  of 
1899  in  regard  to  the  restriction  of  military  expenditures ; 
and,  since  military  expenditures  have  increased  considerably 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  HAGUE  CONFERENCES      735 

in  nearly  every  country  since  the  said  year,  the  Conference 

declares  that  it  is  highly  desirable   to  see  the  governments 

take  up  the  serious  study  of  the  question." 

This    platonic    resolution    was    adopted    unanimously.      A 

grim    commentary    on    its    importance    in    the    eyes    of    the 

governments  is  contained  in  their  naval  programmes  for  1908 

and  1909,  which  included  larger  appropriations  than  ever.  Cost  of  the 

Even  nations  which  have  hitherto  done  without  ships  of  the  ^°  ^^^ 

.  blood  and 
Dreadnought  type  have  begun  to  enter  the  costly  competi- jj.^^^ 

tion,  such  as  Brazil,  Austria-Hungary,  and  Italy,  while  Great 
Britain,  Germany,  and  the  United  States  are  straining  every 
nerve  to  sui'pass  their  rivals.  It  is  estimated  that  the  armies 
of  Europe  number  about  four  million  men  on  a  peace  footing, 
about  ten  million  on  a  war  footing,  and  that  the  cost  of 
maintaining  the  armies  and  navies  of  Great  Britain,  Ger- 
many, and  France  alone  amounts  annually  to  nearly  nine 
hundred  million  dollars  (1909). 

Whether  the  Hague  Conferences  will  be  reckoned  in  history 
as  simply  inconsequential  outbursts  of  sentiment,  as  merely 
the  baseless  fabric  of  a  vision,  or  whether  they  will  be  looked 
upon  as  the  small  beginnings  of  great  institutions,  remains  to 
be  seen.  Meanwhile,  the  comment  of  Elihu  Root,  at  that 
time  American  Secretary  of  State,  may  be  quoted :  "  Each 
Conference  will  inevitably  make  further  progress  and,  by 
successive  steps,  results  may  be  accomplished  which  have 
formerly  appeared  impossible.  .  .  .  The  most  valuable 
result  of  the  Conference  of  1899  was  that  it  made  the  work  Significance 

of  the  Conference  of  1907  possible.     The  achievements  of  the°^  *^^ 

111  L       ,  Peace  Con- 

two  Conferences  justify  the  belief  that  the  world  has  entered ^^^.^^^^gg 

upon  an  orderly  process  through  which,  step  by  step,  in  suc- 
cessive conferences,  each  taking  the  work  of  its  predecessor 
as  its  point  of  departure,  there  may  be  continual  progress 
toward  making  the  practice  of  civilized  nations  conform  to 
their  peaceful  professions."  ^ 

The  Hague  Conference  of  1907  was  more  representative 
^  Hull,  The  Two  Hague  Conferences,  503. 


736  CERTAIN  FEATURES  OF  MODERN  PROGRESS 

than  the  Congress  of  Vienna  of  1815,  with  which  this  history 
opened,  for  it  represented  practically  the  whole  human  race. 
If  the  movement  inaugurated  in  1898  should,  in  the  long 
Arbitration,  result  of  time,  facilitate  the  resort  to  arbitration  as  the 
usual  procedure  of  nations  in  their  relations  with  each  other, 
Nicholas  II  would  have  been  instrumental  in  founding  an 
alliance  far  more  holy  than  the  one  to  which  his  predecessor 
on  the  Russian  throne  gave  such  celebrity  in  the  early  nine- 
teenth century.  The  origins  of  the  British  Parliament  and 
of  the  British  Constitution  were  modest,  indeed.  But  the 
nineteenth  century  saw  every  nation  struggling  to  gain  the 
political  institutions  which  England  had  been  fashioning 
thoughout  the  centuries.  Will  arbitration  enter  into  the 
mentality  of  the  race,  will  it  find  the  same  soHd  lodgment 
amid  the  facts  of  life,  as  have  parliamentarism  and  constitu- 
tionalism.^    And  if  so,  will  it  require  as  many  centuries.'' 

The  historian,  having  reached  the  point  of  interrogation, 
may,  in  all  comity,  leave  the  answer  to  his  question  to  the 
prophet  or  to  the  future.  But  he  may  observe,  in  closing, 
that  contemporary  Europe  is  dominated  by  two  great 
leagues,  the  Triple  Alliance,  consisting  of  Germany,  Austria, 
and  Italy,  and  the  Triple  Entente,  consisting  of  England, 
France,  and  Russia.  The  precise  nature  of  these  combina- 
tions, the  character  and  range  of  the  obligations  they  im- 
pose, have  never  been  made  public.  They  constitute  the 
very  arcana  of  a  profoundly  secret  and  undemocratic  diplo- 
macy.    The  nations  stand  committed  to  they  know  not  what. 

These  two  leagues  confront  each  other,  watchful,  suspi- 
cious, portentously  armed.  Professing  peace  to  be  their 
passion  they  press  forward  in  sinister  and  dangerous 
rivalry  for  military  superiority,  that  is,  for  the  power  to 
destroy.  It  is  a  strange  and  melancholy  fact  that  that 
society  which  is  the  heir  of  all  the  ages  is  more  constantly 
obsessed  by  the  thought  of  war  and  more  unceasingly  occu- 
pied by  preparations  for  it  than  the  most  primitive  society 
of  which  history  bears  record. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

GENERAL  HISTORIES 

Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  X,  The  Restoration,  vol.  XI,  Th^ 
Growth  of  Nationalities,  and  vol.  XII,  The  Latest  Aye  (finnounced). 
The  most  considercable  modern  work  in  English.  A  co-operative  history 
written  b_y  various  English  and  Continental  scholars,  and  including  chap- 
ters on  economic  and  literary  as  well  as  political  history.  Lacks  unity 
but  is  critical  and  informing.  Is  a  kind  of  historical  encyclopedia 
packed  full  of  facts.  A  useful  feature  is  the  bibliographies  connected 
with  each  chapter  which  are  extensive  lists  without  criticism  or  descrip- 
tion. 

Seignobos,  C,  a  Political  History  of  Europe  Since  181^/.  Translation 
edited  by  S.  M.  Macvane.  Brings  the  history  of  each  country  down  to 
about  1897.  Objective,  impartial.  A  strictly  political  history.  Each 
chapter  has  an  excellent,  brief,  critical  bibliography. 

Fyffe,  C.  a.,  History  of  Modern  Europe.  Published  in  three  volumes, 
also  complete  in  one.  Covers  period  1792-1878.  A  careful,  clear, 
scholarly,  admirably  written  political  history  of  the  chief  Continental 
nations. 

Andrews,  C.  M.,  The  Historical  Development  of  Modern  Europe,  2 
vols.  (1896-1898).  Brings  the  history  of  the  chief  Continental  nations 
down  to  1897,  The  smaller  nations  are  not  treated.  The  narrative  is 
clear,  informing,  studiously  fair.  The  most  important  chapters  are 
perhaps  those  on  the  revolutions  of  1848  and  on  the  diplomacy  of  the 
Crimean  War. 

Andrews,  C.  M.,  Contemporary  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa,  (1902). 
Covers  excellently  the  period  from  1871  to  1901.  Forms  a  part  of  the 
series  of  The  History  of  All  Nations. 

Phillips,  W.  Alison,  Modern  Europe,  1815-1899.  A  purely  political 
study,  limited,  moreover,  almost  entirely  to  external  or  diplomatic  history. 
Accurate  and  trustworthy  within  its  circumscribed  limits.  Very  weak 
on  the  period  after  1878. 

Robinson,  J.  H.,  and  Beard,  C.  A.,  The  Development  of  Modern 
Europe,  vol.  II.  Emphasizes  the  significance  of  economic  factors  in 
the  history  of  the  century.  Has  interesting  chapters  on  the  industrial 
revolution,  on  Russia,  on  European  expansion,  and  on  some  of  the  great 
problems  of  to-day. 

MiJLLER,  Political  History  of  Recent  Times.  Pronouncedly  liberal 
point  of  view.     Journalistic,  fairly  full.     Comes  down  to  about  1880. 

KiRKPATRiCK,  F.  A.,  editor,  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the  Nineteenth 
Century.  Cambridge,  1902.  Consists  of  seventeen  lectures  given  by 
various  scholars  to  universitj'  extension  students.  Particularly  interest- 
ing are  the  lectures  on  Germany  by  Marcks,  on  France  by  Mantoux,  and 
on  Russia  by  VinogradoflF. 

Lavisse  et  Rambaud,  Histoire  g4n4rale  du  /Fe  sidcle  d  nos  jours. 
Vols.  X,  XI,  XII  cover  the  period  from  1815  to  1900.  A  co-operative 
history  by  French  scholars.  Articles  are  of  varying,  though  on  the 
whole,  of  high  excellence.  The  narrative  is  generally  clear  and  no| 
overloaded  with  facts.    The  bibliographies  are  very  useful, 

737 


738  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Debidour,  Histoire  diplomatique  de  I'Eiirope,  lSlff-1878,  2  vols.  (1891). 
A  useful  aid  to  the  study  of  the  period,  well  proportioned,  well  arranged 
and  well  written;  on  the  whole  impartial.  Authorities  are  not  quoted 
for  any  statements  and  the  bibliograj^hies  at  the  opening  of  each  chap- 
ter are  inadequate,  miscellaneous,  and  not  critical. 

Bourgeois,  Ebiile,  Manuel  hitilorique  de  politique  etrangere,  3  %'Ols. 
(1905);    vols.    II    and    III    concern    our    period;    come    down    to    1878. 

There  are  many  German  histories  of  this  period.  The  fullest  are  the 
volumes  in  Oncken's  AUgemeine  Geschichte  in  Einzeldarstellungen; 
namely  Flathe,  Das  Zeitalter  der  Restauration  und  Revolution  (1815- 
1851);  BuLLE,  Geschichte  des  zweiten  Kaiserreiches  und  des  Konigreiches 
Italien;  Bamberg,  Geschichte  der  orientalischen  Angelegenheit  im 
Zeitraume  des  Pariser  und  des  Berliner  Friedens;  Oncken,  Das 
Zeitalter  des  Kaisers  Wilhelm.  These  volumes  collectively  cover  the 
period  from  1815  to  1888  in  about  four  thousand  pages. 

Another  excellent  German  work  is  Bulle,  Geschichte  der  neuesten 
Zeit,  4.  vols.  (1886-1887),  covering  the  period  1815-1885.  The  most 
scientific  and  authoritative  history  on  the  years  succeeding  1815  is 
Sterx,  A.,  Geschichte  Europas  seit  den  Vertrcigen  von  1815  bis  zum 
Frankfurter  Frieden  von  1811.  Four  volumes  have  appeared,  carrjing 
the  narrative  down  to  about  1835.  This  work  is  indispensable  to  every 
student.  It  is  rigidly  scientific,  scholarly,  free  from  partisanship,  and 
includes  much  new  archival  material.  It  is  the  most  thorough  and 
most  informing  work  on  the  period  in  any  language  and  considerably 
extends  our  knowledge.     It  ought  to  be  translated. 

Hertslet,  Map  of  Europe  by  Treaty  since  1814,  4  vols.  (1875-1891). 
Contains  treaties  in  English  covering  the  period  from  1814  to  1891, 
showing  how  the  "  Map  of  Europe "  has  been  changed  by  treaties  or  by 
other  international  arrangements  since  the  overthrow  of  Napoleon  I. 

Very  useful  are  the  biographical  dictionaries  of  various  countries:  for 
Austria-Hungary;  Wurzbach,  Biographisches  Le.vikon  des  Kaiserthums 
Oesterreich,  GO  Theile,  Vienna  (1856-1891);  for  Germany;  Liliencron 
und  "Wegele,  AUgemeine  deutsche  Biographic,  I-eipsic  (1875  seq.  — ), 
now  54  volumes;  for  France,  Nouvelle  biographic  generate,  edited  by 
Hoefer,  1855-1866,  46  vols.,  not  limited  to  France;  for  England,  Stephen 
and  Lee,  editors.  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  67  vols.  (1885- 
1903). 

CHAPTER  I 

The  Reconstruction  of  Exjhope 

For  Sources:  See  Kluber,  Akten  des  Wiener  Kongresses;  Hertslet, 
Map  of  Europe  by  Treaty,  vol.  I;  British  and  Foreign  State  Papers, 
vol.  II,  1814-1815.  The  First  and  Second  Treaties  of  Paris  may  be 
found  in  Anderson,  Constitutions  and  Documents,  Nos.  91  and  99;  The 
Treaty  of  the  Holy  Alliance  in  University  of  Pennsylvania,  Translations 
and  Reprints,  vol.  I,  3;  or  in  Robinson  and  Beard,  Readings  in  Modern 
European  History,  vol.  I,  No.  183.  General  Treatment  of  the  Congress: 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  IX,  chaps.  XIX  and  XXI;  Lavisse  et 
Rambaud,  Histoire  generate,  vol.  X,  chap  I;  Debidour,  Histoire  diplo- 
matique, vol.  I,  chap.  I.  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas,  vol.  I,  chap.  I; 
Sorel,  L'Europe  et  la  Revolution  franqaise,  vol.  VIII,  pp.  355-505; 
HoussAYE,  H.,  181Jt.  Oncken,  Das  Zeitalter  der  Revolution,  des 
Kaiserreiches  und  der  Befreiungskriege,  vol.  II,  pp.  833-911;  Treitschke, 
Deutsche  Geschichte  im  Neunzehnten  Jahrhundert,  vol.  I,  pp.  597-711; 
Stbel,  The  Founding  of  the  German  Empire,  vol.  I,  chap.  Ill;  Springer, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  739 

Oeschichte  Oesterreichs,  vol.  I,  pp.  254-274;  Thayer,  Damn  of 
Italian  Independence,  vol.  I,  pp.  llG-138.  See  also  Debidour, 
Etudes  critiques  sur  la  Revolution,  I'Empire  et  la  P4riode  con- 
temporaine,  which  include  studies  on  Talleyrand  an  (Jongrcs  de 
Vienne  and  La  liquidation  de  1815;  see  also  Sorel,  Essais  d'histoire  et 
de  critique,  containing  a  study  on  Talleyrand  au  Congr^s  de  Vienne. 
On  Second  Treaty  of  Paris:  Sorel,  L'Europe  et  la  Revolution,  vol. 
VIII,  pp.  467-493;  Sorel,  Le  Traits  de  Paris  du  20  novemhre,  1815. 
On  Mettcrnich:  Malleson,  Life  of  Prince  Mctternich  (1888);  Mazade, 
Un  chancelier  d'ancien  regime;  Le  r^gne  diplomatique  de  Metternich, 
(1889);  Allgemeine  deutsche  Biographie,  vol.  XXIII,  article  by  Bailleu 
with  critical  bibliography;  Wurzrach,  Biographisches  Lexikon  des 
Kaiserthums  Oesterreich,  Achtzehnter  Theil,  with  extensive  bibliography; 
Sorel,  Essais  d'histoire  et  de  critique,  Metternich,  pp.  3-54;  Debidour, 
Etudes  critiques  sur  la  Revolution,  etc.,  pp.  259-296.  Metternich's 
Memoirs,  in  part,  have  been  translated  into  English  by  Mrs.  Napier, 
5  vols.  For  criticism  of  them,  see:  Bailleu,  Historische  Zeitschrift, 
XLIV,  pp.  227-277,  and  Sorel,  Essais  d'histoire  et  de  critique,  article 
cited  above. 

On  the  lighter  side  of  Congress  of  Vienna,  see:  Memoirs  of  the  Prince 
de  Ligne,  translated  by  Mrs.  Wormeley  (1902) ;  vol.  II,  pp.  261-292,  con- 
taining extracts  from  Lagarde;  see  also  Lagarde,  Comte  de,  The  Journal 
of  a  Nobleman,  being  a  Narrative  of  His  Residence  at  Vienna  During 
the  Congress  (1833). 

CHAPTER  II 

Reaction  in  Austria  and  Germany 

An  invaluable  bibliography  of  German  history  is  Daiilmann-Waitz, 
Quellenkunde  der  deutschen  Oeschichte,  7th  edition,  edited  by  Branden- 
burg (1906-1907). 

The  Act  of  Confederation  and  the  Carlsbad  Decrees  are  in  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  Translations  and  Reprints,  vol.  I,  No.  3;  also  in  Robin- 
son and  Beard,  Readings  in  Modern  European  History,  ?ol.  II.  An  ex- 
cellent collection  of  speeches  illustrating  the  history  of  Germany  from 
1808  to  1893  is  Flathe,  Deutsche  Reden,  2  vols.  (1893-1894). 

On  Austria  in  1815  and  immediately  after:  see.  Stern,  Oeschichte 
Europas,  vol.  I,  chap.  Ill;  Springer,  Oeschichte  Oesterreichs  seit  dem 
Wiener  Frieden,  vol.  I,  275-322.  There  is  in  English  no  history  of 
Germany  in  the  nineteenth  century.  One  has  been  announced  for  many 
years  by  J.  W.  Headlam,  to  cover  the  period  from  1815  to  1889,  but  it 
has  not  yet  appeared.  Henderson,  E.  F.,  A  Short  History  of  Germany, 
vol.  II,  pp.  324-450,  covers  in  an  animated  fashion  the  years  from  1815 
to  1871.  Poultney  Bigelow's  History  of  the  Oerman  Struggle  for 
Liberty,  4  vols.  (1905),  comes  down  to  1848,  but  has  slight  importance, 
containing  too  little  history,  and  too  much  gossip.  The  author's  penchant 
for  the  picturesque  leads  him  far  and  wide  at  times.  An  admirable 
survey,  the  most  satisfactory  treatment  of  Germany  covering  the  period 
of  this  chapter,  is  in  Stern,  Oeschichte  Europas,  vol.  I,  chap,  IV.  See 
also  KaiJfmann,  Politische  Oeschichte  Deutschlands  in  Neunzehnten 
Jahrhundert,  pp.  73-136.  Sybel,  The  Pounding  of  the  Oerman  Empire, 
vol.  I,  pp.  52-81.  The  most  extensive  account  of  these  years  is  Tueit- 
schke's  Deutsche  Oeschichte  im  Neunzehnten  Jahrhundert,  vol.  II,  1814- 
1819.  Treitschke's  history  in  five  volumes  comes  down  to  1848.  It  has 
had  an  immense  popularity  in  Germany.  It  is  based  upon  extensive 
research,  is  full  of  life  and  color.  Treitschke  was  one  of  the  great  prose 
writers    of    Germany.      His    history,    however,    is    a    work    of    art    and 


740  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

propaganda,  not  of  science.  It  is  marked  by  unbridled  chauvinism,  by 
the  frankest  and  most  obtrusive  revelation  of  the  author's  vigorous  pre- 
dilections and  aversions.  Eloquent  and  interesting  throughout,  and 
marked  by  a  wealth  of  historical  and  literary  learning,  it  is  woefully 
lacking  in  impartiality  and  justice.  Treitschke  was  called  to  the  Uni- 
versity of  Berlin  in  1874,  in  the  face  of  the  opposition  of  Ranke,  who 
would"  not  recognize  him  as  an  historian,  but  only  as  a  publicist.  Van 
Deventer,  M.  L.,  Cinquante  annees  de  I'histoire  fecUrale  de  I'Allemagne 
(Brussels,  1870).  A  discussion  of  the  organization  and  character  of  the 
Federal  Constitution  and  an  account  of  the  history  of  the  German 
Confederation  from  its  establishment  in  1815  to  its  dissolution  in  1866. 


CHAPTER  III 

Reactiox  and  Revolution  in  Spain  and  Italy 

For  a  general  account:  see,  Butler  Clarke,  Modern  Spain,  1815-1898, 
chaps.  II  and  III;  Hume,  Modern  Spain,  chap.  V;  Hubbard,  Histoire 
contemporaine  de  I'Espagne.  Vols.  I  and  II  cover  the  reign  of  Ferdi- 
nand VII,  1814-1833.  On  Italy,  between  1815  and  1821:  see,  Thayer, 
W.  R.,  The  Dawn  of  Italian  Independence,  vol.  I,  pp.  139-311,  the  best 
account  in  English;  also,  Stillman,  W.  J.,  The  Unity  of  Italy,  pp.  1-40. 
On  social  conditions  of  Italy  after  1815:  see,  Bolton  King,  A  History 
of  Italian  Unity,  vol.  I,  chaps.  Ill,  IV,  V.  On  the  rise  and  activity  of 
the  secret  societies,  Johnston,  R.  M.,  The  Napoleonic  Empire  in  Southern 
Italy,  vol.  II,  pp.  1-139.  The  most  important  treatment  of  the  whole 
subject  of  the  conditions  in  Spain  and  Italy,  the  revolutions  and  the 
congresses,  is  in  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas,  vol.  II,  chaps.  I,  III-VI, 
VIII-X.  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  X,  chaps.  I,  IV,  VII,  may 
be  consulted.  Also  Treitschke,  Deutsche  Oeschichte,  vol.  Ill,  pp.  131- 
191,  254-283;  Debidour,  L'histoire  diplomatique,  chaps.  III-V.  On 
England's  foreign  policy  from  1815  to  1827:  Walpole,  History  of 
England  since  1815,  vol.  Ill,  chap.  X;  Brodhick  and  Fotheringham, 
History  of  England,  lSOl-1837,  chap.  X;  Paxson,  F.  L.,  The  In- 
dependence of  the  South  American  Republics,  an  excellent  account 
of  the  wars  of  liberation  and  a  study  of  the  policies  of  England  and 
the  United  States.  On  the  Monroe  Doctrine:  Reddaway,  W.  F.,  The 
Monroe  Doctrine  (1898),  or  Turner,  F.  J.,  Rise  of  the  New  West  (1906), 
chap.  XII;  Temperley,  H.  W.  V.,  Life  of  Canning  (1905). 


CHAPTER  IV 
France  During  the  Restoration 

For  sources:  see,  Anderson,  Constitutions  and  Documents,  No.  93, 
Constitutional  Charter  of  1814;  No.  101,  various  press  laws.  On  the 
crisis  and  revolution  of  1830,  76«d',  Nos.  103  and  104,  also:  Robinson  and 
Beard,  Readings  in  Modern  European  History,  vol.  II,  Nos.  185-190.  A 
very  well  chosen  selection  of  extracts  from  the  political  speeches  of  this 
period,  which  was  one  of  high  distinction  in  parliamentary  oratory,  is 
found  in  Chabrier,  Albert,  Les  orateurs  politiques  de  la  France 
(1902);  pp.  389-554  cover  the  period  1815-1830.  For  speeches,  in 
extenso,  one  must  consult  Le  Moniteur  or  Les  archives  parlementaires, 
edited  by  Mavidal  et  Laurent,  second  series.  An  index  volume  facili- 
tates  the  use   of   this   indispensable   but   very   elaborate   work. 

There    is    no    satisfactory    history    of    France    during   the    nineteenth 


BIBLIOGRAPHl  741 

century.  Lebon,  Modern  France,  1789-1895  (Story  of  the  Nations 
Series,  1898),  is  a  brief,  frequently  inaccurate  outline  by  an  active 
politician.  Coubertin,  France  since  ISl'f  (1890),  is  a  brief,  popular, 
unscholarly  account.  W.  G.  Berry,  France  since  Waterloo  (1909),  more 
satisfactory  than  the  preceding,  is  readable  and  useful.  A  very  sug- 
gestive little  book  is  G.  Lowes  Dickinson,  Revolution  and  Reaction  in 
Modern  France  (1892),  not  a  history  of  France,  but  a  description  of  the 
various  phases  and  schools  of  political  thought   from   1789  to   1871. 

On  the  period  of  this  chapter,  1815  to  1830,  there  are  chapters  in  the 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  X,  chaps.  II  and  III,  and  Lavisse  et 
Rambaud,  Ilistoire  gSnSrale,  vol.  X,  chaps.  Ill,  VII,  XI,  XII,  XIII. 
The  most  thorough  and  scholarly  treatment  is  in  Stern,  Oeschichte 
Europas,  vol.  I,  chaps.  I,  VI;  vol.  II,  chaps.  VIII,  X,  XI;  vol. 
Ill,  chap.  X;  vol.  IV,  chap.  I.  See  also  J.  R.  Hall,  The  Bourbon 
Restoration  (1909). 

The  French  works  Viel  Castel,  Histoire  de  la  Restauration,  in  20 
vols.  (1860-1878),  and  Duvergier  de  Hauranne,  Histoire  du  Oouverne- 
ment  parlementaire  en  France,  181Ji-1830,  10  vols.,  may  be  consulted 
as  works  of  reference  but  are  much  too  extensive  and  too  unscientific 
for  general  use.  Viviani's  volume  in  Jaures's  Histoire  Socialiste,  vol. 
VII,  La  Restauration,  181.'f-lS30,  is  brilliantly  written,  abounds  in 
criticism  but  is  marked  by  a  total  absence  of  references  to  authorities 
and  is  one-sided;  useful,  however,  for  the  study  of  social  and  labor 
questions  and  conditions. 

There  are  a  number  of  important  monographs  on  aspects  of  this 
history:  Pierre  Simon's  L' elaboration  de  la  cliarte  constitutionnelle  de 
181.'/,  184  pp.  (1906),  a  valuable  study  containing  a  description  of  the 
sources  used,  a  narrative  of  the  events  of  the  two  months,  April  and 
May,  1814,  which  bore  upon  the  framing  of  the  charter,  and  a  critical 
study  of  the  text — of  the  origin  of  its  general  principles  and  its 
particular  provisions.  Pierre  Rain,  L'Europe  et  la  Restauration  des 
Bourbons  (1908,  493  pp.),  is  a  scholarly  investigation  of  the  first  years 
of  the  Restauration,  1814-1818,  and  an  important  addition  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  supervision  which  the  Allies  exercised  over  the 
French  government  during  the  years  of  military  occupation,  1815-1818. 
Henry  Houssaye,  1815,  La  Seconde  Abdication,  La  Terreur  blanche, 
is  a  graphic  and  on  the  whole  sound  description  of  an  unfortunate  and 
turbulent  year  of  transition,  far  superior  to  E.  Daudet's  La  Terreur 
blanche.  L.  Michon,  Le  Gouvernement  parlementaire  sous  la  Restaura- 
tion (1905,  471  pp.),  is  a  solid  study,  partly  historical,  partly  juristic, 
of  the  introduction  and  establishment  of  the  theory  and  practice  of 
cabinet  and  parliamentary  government  in  France  under  Louis  XVIII 
and  Charles  X.  J.  Barthelemy,  L'Introduction  du  regime  parle- 
mentaire en  France  sous  Louis  XVIII  et  Charles  X  (1904,  323  pp.), 
is  another  valuable  study  of  the  same  subject,  a  work  crowned  by  the 
Faculty  of  Law  of  Paris.  Thureau-Dangin,  Le  parti  liberal  sous  la 
Restauration  (1876),  a  study  of  the  "Opposition"  from  1815  to  1830,  use- 
ful for  an  understanding  of  the  July  Revolution.  On  the  history  of 
the  republican  party  during  this  period:  see,  G.  Weill,  Histoire  du 
parti  republicain  en  France  de  ISl'f  a  1870  (1900),  pp.  1-32.  On 
questions  of  church  and  state  and  the  activity  of  the  clerical  party 
see,  Debidour,  L'Eglise  et  I'^tat  en  France  de  1789-1870,  pp.  325-412^ 
a  valuable  contribution  to  modern  church  history,  readable,  analytical, 
supplied  with  footnotes  and  appendices.  A  special  topic,  fully  treated, 
is  Les  royalistes  contre  I'arm^e,  1815-1820,  by  ^douaud  Bonnal,  Paris, 
(1906),  2  vols.  Useful  books  on  this  and  succeeding  periods  of  French 
history  are:  Duguit  (Leon)  et  Monnier  (Henry),  Les  constitutions  et 
lea  principales   lois  politiques   de   la  France   depuis  1789,  based   upon 


742  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

ofScial  texts  and  containing  an  analytical  index  (1898);  Helie,  F.  A., 
Les  cotistitutions  de  la  France  (1880),  contains  the  texts  of  the  various 
constitutions  and  historical  notes.  E.  Pierre,  Histoire  cles  assembles 
poUtiques  en  France  (1877),  covering  the  years  1789  to  1831,  and  G.  D. 
Weil,  Les  lUections  lot/iskitives  depuis  1789  (1895),  are  useful.  Much 
information,  in  clear  and  compact  form,  on  constitutions,  electoral  laws, 
liberties,  finances,  army,  nary,  education,  letters,  sciences,  and  arts,  may 
be  found  in  Rambaud,  Histoire  de  la  civilisation  contemporaine  en  France 
(Paris,  1888,  2  vols.);  vol.  II,  320-734.,  covers  the  period  from  1814  to 
1888. 

CHAPTER  V 

Revolxjtioxs  Beyond  France 

Much  the  most  scholarly  and  authoritative  treatment  of  the  revolu- 
tionary movements  in  the  Netherlands,  Poland,  Italy,  and  Germany,  is 
Stern,  Geschichte  Enropas,  vol.  IV,  chaps.  II-VI.  The  Cambridc/e 
Modern  History,  vol.  X,  and  Lavisse  et  Rambaud,  Histoire  generate, 
vol.  X,  have  sections  on  the  subjects  treated  in  this  chapter;  also 
Debidour,  L'histoire  diplomatique,  vol.  I,  chaps.  VII-IX.  On  Poland, 
1815-1830:  consult,  Schiemann,  Oeschichte  Rtisslands  unter  Nikolaiis  I, 
vol.  I,  chaps.  V,  YI;  vol.  II,  chap.  XII;  also  Skrine,  Expansion  of 
Russia,  pp.  110-132.  The  movements  in  Germany  are  described  in 
Treitschke,  Deutsche  Geschichte,  vol.  IV,  chap.  II;  in  Kaufmann, 
Politische  Oeschichte  Deutschlands,  pp.  170-193;  in  Sybel,  The  Found- 
ing of  the  German  Empire,  vol.  I,  pp.  82-107.  For  events  in  Italy: 
consult,  Thayer,  Dawn  of  Italian  Independence,  vol.  I,  pp.  342-378, 


CHAPTER  VI 
Reign  of  Louis  Philippe 

For  sources:  see,  Anderson,  Constitutions  and  Documents,  No.  105, 
the  constitution  of  1830,  and  No.  106,  the  electoral  law  of  1831; 
Robinson  and  Beard,  Readings  in  Modern  European  History,  vol.  II, 
No.  213,  Louis  Blanc's  labor  programme.  Illustrative  extracts  from 
parliamentary  speeches  are  in  Pellisson,  Les  orateurs  poUtiques  de  la 
France  de  1830  a  nos  jours  (1898),  pp.  1-208.  The  most  extensive 
French  history  on  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe  is  that  by  Thureau- 
Dangin,  Histoire  de  la  monarchie  de  juillet,  7  vols.  (1884-1892).  Very 
different  in  interpretation  and  emphasis  is  Fournlere's  Le  r^gne  de 
Louis  Philippe  (Jaures,  Histoire  Socialiste,  vol.  VIII).  Hillebrand, 
Geschichte  Frankreichs  1830-18^8,  3  vols.  (1877-1879),  is  a  work  of 
value.  Louis  Blanc's  Histoire  de  dix  ans  (1830-1840),  5  vols.,  is 
important  for  the  radical  movements  of  the  time.  See  also.  Stein,  L., 
Geschichte  der  socialen  Bewegung  in  Frankreich,  3  vols.  (1850).  Covers 
years  1789  to  1849.  An  admiralile  treatment  of  the  first  five  years 
of  the  reign  is  found  in  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas,  vol.  IV,  chaps.  I 
and  XII.  A  favorable  view  of  the  policy  of  Louis  Philippe  is  given 
by  Professor  Bourgeois  in  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  X,  chap. 
XV,   and   vol.   XI,   chap   II. 

On  the  history  of  the  Republicans:  Weill,  Histoire  du  parti  rSpubli- 
cain,  pp.  33-375,  a  careful  study  based  upon  a  large  number  of  pam- 
phlets, memoirs,  and  newspapers,  and  containing  an  excellent  bibli- 
ography   and    index.      I.    Tchernoff,    Le    parti    r6publicain    sous    la 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  743 

monarchie  cie  juillet  (1901),  shows  that  the  doctrines  of  the  republicans 
were  changing  under  the  stress  of  new  and  imperative  needs  and  were 
not  a  mere  repetition  of  revolutionary  phrases.  Carefully  documented. 
Octave  Festy's  Le  mouvement  ouvrier  au  d4hut  de  la  monarchie  de 
juillet,  2  vols.  (1908),  covers  tlie  years  1830-1834,  and  is  an  important 
monograpli  tracing  the  growth  of  labor  organizations  and  the  develop- 
ment of  the  ideas  and  programmes  of  the  working  class.  Debidour, 
L'Eglise  et  I'^tat  en  France,  pp.  413-480,  describes  the  relation  of  the 
church  and  state  during  the  reign.  Debidour,  Etudes  critiques  sur  la 
Revolution,  etc.,  has  essays  on  Louis  Philijipe  Emigre  and  Metternich  et 
le  gouvernement  de  juillet.  A.  Bardoux,  Guizot  (1894),  is  a  criticism  of 
Guizot  as  statesman,  historian,  political  orator,  critic,  and  publicist. 
Other  biographies  are  J.  de  Crozals,  Guizot;  I.  Tchernoff,  Louis  Blanc 
(1904);  E.  Zevort,  Thiers  (1892);  de  Mazade,  Thiers,  Cinquante  annees 
d'histoire  contemporaine  (1884);  and  Jules  Simon,  Thiers,  Guizot, 
Remusat  (1885). 

CHAPTER  VII 

Central  Europe  Between  Two  Revolutions 

For  Prussia  during  this  period  there  is  no  good  history  in  English. 
Sybel  covers  these  years  briefly  in  The  Founding  of  the  German 
Empire,  vol.  I,  pp.  82-141.  The  fullest  treatment  in  German  is  that  of 
Treitscuke,  Deutsche  Geschichte;  among  the  important  subjects  treated 
are  the  ZoUverein,  vol.  IV,  pp.  350-406;  railroads  and  telegraphs, 
vol.  IV,  pp.  581-598;  accession  and  early  reign  of  Frederick  William  IV, 
vol.  V,  pp.  3-60;  on  dissatisfaction  with  the  reign  and  general  con- 
fusion, vol.  V,  pp.  138-275;  on  economic  conditions,  vol.  V,  pp.  433-523; 
on  the  United  Landtag  of  1847,  vol.  V,  pp.  591-648.  Kaufmann, 
PoUtische  Geschichte,  covers  this  period,  pp.  193-218;  273-304.  On  the 
ZoUverein:  see  also,  B.  Rand,  Economic  History,  chap.  VIII;  also  W.  H. 
Dawson,  Protection  in  Germany  (1904),  chaps.  I  and  II,  the  best 
book  in  English  on  German  commercial  policy,  and  coming  down  to 
the  tariff  of  1902. 

On  Austria:  see,  Springer,  Geschichte  Oesterreichs  seit  dem  Wiener 
Frieden,  Zweiter  Theil,  pp.  1-134;  Leger,  L.,  A  History  of  Austro- 
Hungary  from  the  earliest  Time  to  the  Year  1889.  Translated 
by  Mrs.  B.  Hill  (1889),  chaps.  XXVII-XXIX;  Whitman,  S., 
Austria  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series),  chaps.  XXII-XXIII.  On 
Hungary:  Eisenmann,  L.,  Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois  de  1867 
Etude  sur  le  dualisme  (1904),  pp.  1-71,  contains  an  excellent  survey  of 
the  old  regime  in  Hungary,  a  description  of  the  Hungarian  constitution 
and  the  relations  of  Hungary  to  the  Austrian  monarchy,  and  an  account 
of  the  awakening  of  the  new  ideas  and  the  preparation  for  revolution; 
a  very  valuable  monograph,  containing  a  bibliography  of  the  source 
and  secondary  material.  Florence  Arnold  Forster,  Dedk,  A  Memoir, 
first  published  anonymously  in  1880  with  a  preface  by  M.  E.  Grant 
Duff,  is  a  very  useful  biography.  On  Bohemia:  E.  Denis,  La  Boh^me 
depuis  la  M ontagne-Blanche ,  2  vols.  (1903).  Vol.  II,  675  pp.,  constitutes 
probably  the  best  history  of  Bohemia  from  1815  to  1901,  detailed  and 
full.  Pages  87-231  cover  the  j^ears  1815  to  1848.  Some  of  the  subjects 
treated  are  the  Czech  renaissance,  literature,  science,  the  Metternich 
regime,  the  growth  of  the  spirit  of  nationality,  the  years  1848-1849. 

For  Italy:  Thayer,  W.  R.,  The  Dawn  of  Italian  Independence,  vol.  I, 
pp.  379-453;  vol.  II,  pp.  1-76;  also  the  various  histories  cited  above 
by  King,  Stillman,  Cesaresco,  Probyn.  L.  C.  Farini,  The  Roman 
State  from  1815-1850,  translated  by  W.  E.  Gladstone,  4  vols.   (1852). 


744  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Farini  was  a  Liberal  politician  opposed  to  Clericals  and  Republicans, 
and  generally  well  informed.  R.  M.  Johnston,  The  Roman  Theoc- 
rac]i  and  the  Bepiiblic,  IS.'iG-lS.'id,  pp.  1-112,  on  the  election  and  early- 
years  of  the  pontificate  of  Pius  IX.  Bulle,  O.,  Die  italienische  Eiv^ 
hcitsidee  in  ihrcr  literarischen  Entwicklung  von  Parini  bis  Manzoni 
(Berlin,  1893).  A  valuable  monograph  on  the  early  presentation  of  the 
ideal  of  national  unity  as  contained  in  the  writings  of  Parini  and 
Alfieri,  on  the  intellectual  movement  during  the  Revolutionary  and 
Napoleonic  period,  mirrored  in  the  works  of  Monti  and  Foscolo,  and  on 
the  patriotic  significance  of  Manzoni's  productions.  Important  as  show- 
ing the  pre-Mazzinian  development  of  the  idea  of  unity.  The  best 
biography  of  Mazzini  is  that  by  Bolton  King,  Joseph  Mazzini  (1902). 
Pages  1-221  are  devoted  to  a  chronological  account  of  Mazzini's  life,  222- 
341  mainly  to  a  presentation  of  his  principal  teachings.  Includes  a 
bibliography.  Myers,  F.  W.  H.,  Essays — Modern;  contains  an  excellent 
study  of  Mazzini's  life.  Some  of  the  works  of  Mazzini  have  been  trans- 
lated into  English  and  published  in  six  volumes  under  the  title,  Life  and 
Writings  of  Joseph  Mazzini  (1890-1891).  A  small  collection  of  Essays  by 
Joseph  Mazzini  has  been  made  by  Thomas  Okey  (1894).  There  is  now 
being  published  in  Italy  a  complete  collection  of  Mazzini's  writings, 
Scritti  editi  ed  inediti  di  Giuseppe  Mazzini.  This  will  probably  number 
sixty  volumes  when  completed,  will  include  the  vast  correspondence  of 
Mazzini,  and  will  inevitably  constitute  the  most  important  source  for 
the  history  of  Italy  during  the  awakening.  There  is  an  interesting 
essay  on  Mazzini  in  W.  R.  Thayer's  Italica  (1908),  and  brief  popular 
sketches  may  be  found  in  J.  A.  R.  Marriott's  Makers  of  Modern  Italy, 
and  in  R.  S.  Holland's  Builders  of  United  Italy  (1908). 


CHAPTER  VIII 

Central  Europe  in  Revolt 

Excellent  general  accounts  of  the  revolutions  of  1848-1849  are  to 
be  found  in  Fyffe,  History  of  Modern  Europe,  single  volume  edition, 
pp.  707-804,  three  volume  edition,  vol.  Ill,  pp.  1-148;  and  in  Andrews, 
Historical  Development  of  Modern  Europe,  vol.  I,  chaps.  IX  and  X. 
Maurice,  C.  E.,  The  Revolutionary  Movement  of  1848-lS.'f9,  in  Italy, 
Austria-Hungary ,  and  Germany,  with  some  Examination  of  the  Previous 
Thirty-three  Years  (1887),  contains  a  great  amount  of  information, 
poorly  presented;  also  contains  a  bibliography. 

For  Austria,  the  chief  authorities  are  Friedjung,  H.,  Oesterreich  von 
1848  bis  1860.  Vol.  I  covers  the  period  from  1848  to  1851  (1908); 
Springer,  Geschichte  Oesterreichs,  Zweiter  Theil,  pp.  135-774;  Helfert, 
J.  A.,  Geschichte  Oesterreichs  seit  1848.  For  Hungarj^,  the  most  im- 
portant treatment  is  Eisenmann,  Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois,  pp.  75- 
148.  Consult,  also  Arnold  Forster,  Dedk,  A  Memoir,  pp.  72-112. 
Kossuth's  Speeches  in  America,  explaining  and  defending  the  Hungarian 
movement,  were  edited  by  F.  W.  Newman  and  published  in  New  York  in 
1854.  For  Bohemia:  Denis,  La  Boheme  depuis  la  Montagne-Blanche 
(1903),  vol.  II,  pp.  235-381. 

For  Germany:  see,  Sybel,  The  Founding  of  the  German  Empire, 
vol.  I,  pp.  145-492;  vol.  II,  pp.  3-82;  Kaufmann,  Politische  Geschichte 
Deutschlands,  chap.  V;  Matter,  P.,  La  Prusse  et  la  Revolution 
de  1848  (1903).  The  best  account  of  the  German  revolution  is  in  Hans 
Blum's  Die  deutsche  Revolution,  1848-49  (1897).  A  sketch  of  the 
attempts  to  achieve  unity  before  1848,  followed  by  an  account  of  the 
revolutionary  movements  in  the  several  states  and  of  the  work  of  the 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  745 

Frankfort  Parliament.  Bismarck's  opinions  on  the  revolutionary  events 
are  in  his  Reflections  and  Reminiscences,  vol.  I,  chaps.  II  and  III.  Vol. 
I  of  the  Reminiscences  of  Carl  Schurz  (1907),  a  revolutionist  and 
refugee,  are  exceedingly  interesting  on  these  years. 

For  Italy,  by  far  the  best  account  in  English  is  Thayer,  Dawn  of 
Italian  Independence,  vol.  II,  pp.  77-415.  On  the  French  expedition 
against  the  Roman  Republic:  see.  Bourgeois  et  Clermokt,  Rome  et  Na- 
poleon III;  also  the  recent  scholarly  and  very  graphic  book  of  G.  M. 
Trevelyan  on  Garibaldi's  Defence  of  the  Roman  Republic  (1907).  Chap- 
ters I,  II,  and  III  give  an  admirable  account  of  Garibaldi's  previous 
career,  and  chaps.  XII-XVII  a  description  of  his  famous  retreat.  An 
excellent  bibliography  is  appended.  Garibaldi's  own  account  is  contained 
in  his  Autobiography ,  translated  by  A.  Werner,  vol.  II,  pp.  1-51.  On 
Mazzini's  connection  with  the  Republic:  see,  Bolton  King's  Life  of  Maz- 
zini,  chap.  VII,  R.  M.  Johnston,  Roman  Theocracy,  pp.  113-315,  may 
also  be  consulted  on  the  years   1848-1849. 


CHAPTER  IX 

The  Second  Republic  and  the  Founding  of  the  Second  Empire 

The  Constitution  of  1848  may  be  found  in  Anderson,  Constitutions 
and  Documents,  No.  110.  There  are  clear  accounts  of  the  Second  Re- 
public, by  Bourgeois,  in  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  chap.  V, 
and  by  Seignobos  in  Lavisse  et  Rambaud,  Histoire  gciUrale,  vol.  XI, 
chap.  I.  General  histories  arc:  Pierre,  V.,  Histoire  de  la  republique  de 
18-'tS,  2  vols.  (1873-1878),  anti-Bonapartist;  Gorge,  Histoire  de  la 
deuxi^me  republique,  2  vols.  (1887),  written  from  the  standpoint  of  sym- 
pathy with  a  liberal  monarchy,  critical  of  the  republic,  and  merciless 
toward  sociiilists  and  socialistic  theories.  An  admirable  counterweight  to 
this  is  Georges  Renard's  La  republique  de  ISJ/S  (18^8-1852),  vol.  IX  of 
Histoire  Socialiste.  Part  I,  pp.  1-237,  is  devoted  to  the  political  history, 
Part  II,  pp.  227-384,  to  the  economic  and  social  evolution.  Important 
for  the  period  are:  Debidour,  L'Eglise  et  I'Etat  en  France,  pp.  481-523 
on  the  expedition  to  Rome  and  the  Falloux  law  concerning  education; 
Bourgeois  et  Clermont,  Rome  et  Napoleon  III,  a  study  in  diplomacy, 
based  upon  unpublished  official  documents  as  well  as  upon  published 
material,  and  showing  that  the  Roman  expedition  of  1849  prepared  the 
Empire  by  forming  a  close  alliance  between  Louis  Napoleon,  the  clergy, 
and  the  army;  Quentin-Bauchart,  P.,  Lamar  tine,  homme  politique, 
2  vols.  (1903-1908).  Excellent  recent  studies  are:  Ferdinand  Dreyfus, 
L'assistance  sous  la  deuxi^me  republique  (1907),  220  pp.,  a  treatment  of 
the  question  of  poverty  and  an  account  of  the  various  measures  of  social 
reform  passed  at  this  time;  Weill,  G.,  Histoire  du  parti  r6publicain  en 
France,  chaps.  IX  and  X;  I.  Tciiernoff,  Associations  et  soci4tes  secretes 
sous  la  deuxieme  republique,  18-'i8-1851  (1905),  396  pp.,  a  treatise  based 
upon  much  unpublished  material  in  the  archives  of  the  ministries  of 
justice  and  the  interior;  aims  to  show  that  the  coup  d'etat  was  prepared 
by  the  previous  systematic  destruction  of  republican  organizations;  a 
collection  of  valuable  documents;  I.  Tchernoff,  Le  parti  r^publicain  au 
Coup  d'Etat  et  sous  le  Second  Empire  (1906),  676  pp.,  richly  docu- 
mented, shows  that  the  coup  d'etat  was  far  from  being  received  by  the 
laboring  classes  with  amiable  ^indifference;  I.  Tchernoff,  Louis  Blanc, 
1904;  Tenot,  E.,  The  Cotip  d'Etat;  TiiiRmA,Napoleon  III  aimnt  I'Empire, 
2  vols.,  is  an  apology  for  the  Prince  President,  diffuse,  useful  as  show- 
ing the  state  of  public  opinion,  as  the  author  has  industriously  ran- 
sacked English  and   French  newspaper   files;   Cheetham,   F.   H.,  Louis 


746  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Napoleon  and  the  Genesis  of  the  Second  Republic;  being  a  Life  of  the 
Emperor  Napoleon  III  to  the  Time  of  His  Election  to  the  Presidency 
of  the  French  Republic  (1909),  is  a  popular,  readable  narrative,  but 
adds  nothing  to  our  knowledge;  Jerrold,  The  Life  of  Napoleon  III,  De- 
rived from  State  Records,  from  Unpublished  Family  Correspondence, 
and  from  Personal  Testimony,  4  vols.  (1871-1874),  is  sympathetic  and 
full;  Forbes,  A.,  Life  of  Napoleon  III,  is  popular,  superficial,  untrust- 
wortlij';  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  Bonapartism,  Six  Lectures  Delivered  in  the 
University  of  London  (1908),  is  popular  and  brilliantly  written,  at- 
tempts to  show  the  essential  unity  of  the  two  Napoleonic  regimes,  more 
interesting  and  suggestive  than  convincing;  Pellisson,  Les  orateurs 
politiques,  pp.  209-277,  contains  interesting  extracts  from  parliamentary 
speeches. 

For  the  Second  Empire,  the  leading  secondary  authority  is  Gorge, 
Histoire  du  Second  Empire,  7  vols.  (1894-1905),  the  fullest  and  ablest 
history  we  have  of  the  period  from  1850  to  1871,  very  important,  not 
only  for  the  history  of  France,  but  of  Italy  and  Germany  also.  Presents 
a  wealth  of  information  with  great  ludicity,  admirable  impartiality,  and 
largeness  of  view.  An  indispensable  work.  Vols.  I,  pp.  1-131,  and  II, 
pp.  1-129,  cover  the  field  of  this  chapter.  Taxile  Delord,  Histoire  du 
Second  Empire,  6  vols.  (1869-1875),  an  older  work,  based  on  careful 
research,  strongly  opposed  to  the  Empire.  Albert  Thomas,  Le  Second 
Empire  (Histoire  Socialiste,  vol.  X),  very  instructive;  see  chaps.  I  and  II. 
There  is  no  satisfactory  account  of  the  Second  Empire  in  English. 
Chapters  I  and  IV  in  vol.  II  of  Andrews,  Historical  Development  of 
Modern  Europe,  are  clear  and  well-balanced,  but  necessarily  restricted. 
See,  also,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  chap.  X.  For  the  history 
of  the  relations  of  church  and  state:  see,  Debidour,  L'Egli-se  et  I'Etat 
en  France,  pp.  524-550;  for  history  of  the  republican  party:  Weill, 
Histoire  du  parti  republicain,  chaps.  XI-XIII ;  I.  Tcherxoff,  Le  parti 
republicain  an  Coup  d'Etat  et  sous  le  Second  Empire;  for  description  of 
the  political  system  of  the  autocratic  Empire:  see,  Bertox,  L' evolution 
constitutionelle  du  Second  Empire.  Part  I  treats  of  the  despotic  em- 
pire and  the  constitution  of  1852.  A  ver\'  important  monograph.  For 
labor  and  social  questions  and  movements:  Weill,  G.,  Histoire  du 
mouvement  social  en  France,  1852-1902  (1905),  chaps.  I-III. 


CHAPTER  X 

Cavour  and  the  Creation  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy 

The  general  histories  of  Italy  on  this  period  are:  King,  A  History  of 
Italian  Unity,  2  vols.,  the  most  extensive  and  informing  history  in 
English,  thoroughly  documented.  Vol.  I,  pp.  353-416,  and  all  of  vol.  II 
concern  the  period  of  this  chapter;  Cesaresco,  The  Liberation  of  Italy, 
pp.  165-415,  written  with  much  charm,  sjTnpathy,  and  understanding, 
but  without  scientific  apparatus;  Stillman,  The  Union  of  Italy,  pp.  242- 
325;  Probyn,  Italy  1815-1890,  pp.  159-24?.  There  is  an  excellent  chap- 
ter in  Walpole's  History  of  Twenty-five  Years,  vol.  I,  pp.  206-308. 
Much  the  best  account  of  Napoleon  Ill's  Italian  policy  and  of  the  war 
of  1859  is  in  Gorge,  Histoire  du  Second  Empire,  vol.  II,  pp.  211-449, 
and  vol.  Ill,  pp.  1-123;  and  on  the  annexations.  Ibid.  vol.  Ill,  pp.  125- 
212,  a  treatment  marked  by  admirable  lucidity,  keenness  of  analysis, 
solidity  of  judgment,  and  sustained  interest  of  narration.  For  Cavour: 
see,  Cesaresco,  Cavour  (1898),  a  brief  biography  of  unusual  merits, 
well-informed,  just  to  the  other  figures  of  the  time  as  well  as  to 
Cavour,  epigrammatic,  full  of  color  and  life.    Coimtess  Cesaresco  traces 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  747 

the  shifting  diplomacy  of  the  period  with  precision  and  comprehension. 
Her  chapters  on  the  internal  reforms  in  Piedmont  and  her  revelation 
of  Cavour's  activity  between  tlie  interview  of  Plombiferes  and  April  1859 
are  admirable.  William  ue  la  Hive,  Le  Comte  de  Cavour,  R4cits  et 
Souvenirs  (Paris,  1863),  an  intimate  portrait  by  a  close  personal  friend. 
This  has  been  translated  into  English  by  Edward  Romilly  (London, 
18()2),  but  the  French  edition  is  preferable.  D.  Berti,  II  Conte  di  Cavour 
avanti  il  ISJ/S  (1886),  important.  Villari  in  his  Studies,  Critical  and 
Historical  (London,  1907),  has  a  chapter  on  the  youth  of  Cavour 
(pp.  119-141).  D.  Zanichelli,  Cavour  (1905),  a  solid  study  by  a 
professor  in  the  University  of  Pisa.  N.  Bianchi,  La  politique  du 
Cointe  Camille  de  Cavour  de  1852  a  1861,  Lettres  inedites,  419  pp. 
(1885),  is  an  important  collection  of  over  two  hundred  letters  of  Cavour 
to  Marquis  Emmanuel  d'Azeglio,  the  ambassador  of  Piedmont  to  Eng- 
land during  the  period.  Treitschke,  Cavour,  in  vol.  Ill  of  his  His- 
torische  und  PoUtische  Aufsdtze,  a  study  first  published  in  1869,  and 
Kraus,  F.  X.,  Cavour,  Die  Erhebung  Italiens  im  Neunzehnten  Jahr- 
hundert,  with  bibliography  and  illustrations  (1902),  may  also  be  con- 
sulted; see,  also,  Mazade,  Le  Comte  de  Cavour  (1877).  The  parlia- 
mentary speeches  of  Cavour  have  been  published  in  12  vols.,  Discorsi 
parlementari  (1863-1874),  and  Chiala,  L.,  has  edited  his  correspondence, 
Lettere  edite  ed  inedite  di  Camillo  Cavour,  3nd  edit.  (1883-1887), 
10  vols.  Chiala's  extensive  introductions  and  notes  in  these  volumes  are 
of  great  value.  See,  also,  Bert,  A.,  Nouvelles  lettres  inedites  de 
Cavour  (1889).  Brief  essays  on  Cavour  are  found  in  Marriott's 
Makers  of  Modern  Italy,  and  in  Holland's  Builders  of  United  Italy. 
Lord  Acton  has  a  suggestive  essay  on  Cavour,  first  published  in  1861, 
and  reprinted  in  1907,  in  his  Historical  Essays  and  Studies,  chap.  VL 
W.  R.  Thayer  compares  Cavour  and  Bismarck  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly, 
March  1909;  same  article  Fortniyhtly  Review,  March  and  April  1909. 
Nigra,  Cavour  and  Madame  de  Circourt  (1894),  contains  some  un- 
published letters  from  the  jears  1836-1860.  Cadogan's  Life  of  Cavour  is 
worthless. 

On  Garibaldi  the  most  recent  work  is  G.  M.  Trevelyan,  Garibaldi 
and  the  Thousand  (1909),  an  account  of  the  Sicilian  expedition. 
Another  volume  is  announced  by  the  same  author  to  cover  the  conquest 
of  the  mainland.  These,  with  the  work  already  cited  by  the  same 
author  on  Garibaldi's  Defence  of  the  Roman  Republic,  will  constitute  the 
most  scholarly  account,  in  English,  of  Garibaldi's  career.  Their  literary 
merit  is  high.  Each  volume  contains  a  critical  bibliography.  W.  R. 
Thaytje's  Throne  Makers  (1899),  has  a  spirited  essay  on  Garibaldi.  H.  R. 
Whitehouse,  Collapse  of  the  Kinydom  of  Naples  (1899),  gives  a  brief 
survey  of  affairs  in  Naples  down  to  1848,  describes  the  reaction  of  the 
years   1850-1859,   and   then  the   catastrophe   of   I860;   an   excellent  book. 

On  the  Papacy:  see,  R.  de  Cesare,  The  Last  Days  of  Papal  Rome  (1850- 
1870),  translated  by  Helen  Zimmern,  with  an  introduction  by  G.  M. 
Trevelyan  (Boston,  1909).  The  Birth  of  Modern  Italy  (1909)  con- 
sists of  the  posthumous  papers  of  Jessie  White  Mario,  edited  by  the 
Duke  Litta-Visconti-Arese  ;  interesting  for  the  careers  of  Mazzini  and 
Garibaldi  whose  friend  Madame  Mario  was;  unjvist  toward  Cavour;  full 
of  the  emotion  of  the  Risorgimento — at  least  of  the  republican  agitation. 
Della  Rocca,  The  Autobioyraphy  of  a  Veteran  (1898),  is  an  inter- 
esting narrative  by  an  important  participant  in  events  from  1848  to 
1870. 

The  most  elaborate  Italian  histories  of  the  Risorgimento  are: 
Tivaroni,  C,  Storia  critica  del  risoryimento  d'ltalia  (Turin,  1888-1897), 
9  vols.;  and,  Bersezio,  V.,  II  regno  di  Vittorio  Emanuele  II;  Trent'  anni 
di  vita  italiana  (Turin,  1878-1895),  8  vols. 


748  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

CHAPTER  XI 
Bismarck  and  German  Unity 

There  is  no  satisfactory  work  in  English  on  the  founding  of  tht. 
German  Empire.  Headlam's  long-promised  work  in  the  Cambridge 
Ilislurical  Series  has  not  yet  appeared.  JNIalleson's  The  Refounding  of 
the  Cicnnan  Empire  IS-iS-lSll  (18!)!})  is  brief  and  concerned  chiefly 
with  military  events.  The  articles  in  the  Cambridge  Modern  History  are 
unsatisfactory.  Wai.poi.e,  History  of  Twenty-Five  Years,  vol.  II,  chaps. 
X  and  XIII,  is  straightforward,  informing,  concerned  mainly  with 
diplomacy.  Sybel's  The  Founding  of  the  German  Empire  by  William  I, 
7  vols.  (1890-1898),  is  a  moimmental  work,  based  chiefly  upon  Prussian 
state  documents,  to  which  he  alone  was  allowed  access  by  Bismarck. 
While  a  work  of  remarkable  industry  and  erudition,  it  is  a  thorough- 
going defense  and  panegj-ric  of  the  conduct  of  the  Prussian  Govern- 
ment. Moreover,  in  many  important  matters  it  is  not  subject  to 
eflfective  control.  Zwieuexeck-Sijdenhorst's  Deutsche  Geschichtc  von  der 
Auflosung  des  alien  bis  zur  Errichtiing  des  neuen  Kaiserreichs,  1S06- 
1871,  3  vols.  (1905),  is  characterized  by  much  the  same  partisanship, 
as  is  also  Ottokar  Lorexz's  Kaiser  Wilhelm  und  die  Be(/riindung  des 
Reichs,  1866-1811  (Jena,  1902).  On  the  other  hand,"  the  German 
scholarship,  which  commands  greater  respect  aljroad  as  more  critical 
and  objective,  is  that  of  Marcks,  Lenz,  Delbrlick,  Meinecke,  who  are 
adhering  to  the  Ranke  traditions  of  historical  writing.  H.  Friedjuxg's 
Der  Kampf  um  die  Vorherrschaft  in  Deutschland,  is  bj'  an  Austrian 
scholar  and  covers  the  years  1859-1866,  2  vols.  (1898).  It  is  the  most 
important  treatment  we  have  of  the  relations  of  Prussia  and  Austria 
on  the  critical  years  before  1866.  Contains  also  an  excellent  account  of 
the  Austro-Prussian  war.  The  work  is  already  in  its  seventh  edition. 
One  of  the  most  brilliant  and  suggestive  books  on  this  period  is  by  E. 
Denis,  La  fondation  de  I'empire  allemand  (1906),  a  study  covering 
the  years  1850  to  1870,  limited  to  a  single  series  of  facts,  those  which 
prepared  and  which  explain  the  foundation  of  the  German  Empire. 
Large  space  is  given  to  the  evolution  of  ideas  and  to  the  economic 
transformation.  The  book  is  marked  by  profound  and  wide  investiga- 
tion, by  penetration  and  subtlety  of  characterization,  by  an  admirable 
impartiality.     It  contains  no  references,  footnotes,  or  bibliography. 

The  literature  on  Bismarck  is  very  extensive  and  is  constantly  expand- 
ing. His  speeches  have  been  published  by  Kohl,  Die  politischen  Reden 
des  Fiirsten  Bismarck,  14  vols.  (1892-1905).  There  is  an  excellent 
selection  in  two  small  volumes,  sold  cheaply,  entitled.  Otto  von  Bis- 
marck, Setzen  wir  Deutschland  in  den  Battel,  Reden  aus  der  grossen 
Zeit,  edited  by  Ecgen  Kalkschmidt  (1907).  A  smaller  collection  is  that 
of  Otto  Lyon,  Bismarcks  Reden  nnd  Brief e  (Leipsic,  1895).  Professor 
Hermann  Schoenfeld  has  published  a  collection  entitled  Bismarck's 
Speeches  and  Letters  (in  German,  1905).  The  Correspondence  of 
William  I  and  Bismarck,  ivith  Other  Letters  from  and  to  Prince  Bis- 
marck, translated  by  J.  A.  Ford,  2  vols.  (1903),  consists  of  about  five 
hundred  letters,  selected  by  Bismarck  himself,  to  show  his  relationship 
to  the  Emperor  and  also  to  authenticate  and  supplement  his  Remi- 
niscences in  certain  respects.  Prince  Bismarck's  Letters  to  His  Wife, 
His  Sister  and  Others,  from  18U  to  1870,  translated  by  F.  Maxse  (New 
York,  1878),  are  vivacious  and  entertaining. 

Bismarck's  Reflections  and  Reminiscences,  2  vols.  (1899),  are  im- 
portant but  must  be  used  with  caution.  For  criticism  of  them,  see, 
Erich  Marcks,  Fiirst  Bismarcks  Gedanken  und  Erinnerungen.  Versuch 
einer   kritischen    WUrdigung    (1899);   also   Max   Lenz,   Zur  Kritik   der 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  749 

Oedanken  und  Erinnerungen  des  Fiirslen  Bismarck  (1899);  Friedrich 
Meinecke,  Historische  Zeitschriff,  Band  8i?,  pp.  283-295;  Sokel,  Etudes 
de  liflerature  ef  dliistoire  (1901).  On  the  new  Bismarck  historiography 
(writings  of  Busch,  Blume,  Bamberger,  etc.),  sec,  Hans  DelbrIjck, 
Preussische  Jahrbiicher,  Band  96,  pp.  461-480  (June,  1899).  There  are 
many  biographies  of  Bismarck.  The  best  in  English  is  that  by  Headlam, 
J.  W.,  well  informed  and  judicial.  Munroe  Smith,  Bismarck  and  Ger- 
man Unity  (1898),  is  a  clear  epitome,  with  a  slight  bibliography.  In 
French,  P.  I.Iatter,  Bismarck  et  son  temps,  3  vols.  (1905-1908),  full, 
critical,  remarkably  impartial,  and  very  readable.  In  German,  Max 
Lenz,  Geschichte  Bismarcks  (1902),  compact  and  critical;  Erich 
Marcks,  Bismarck,  Eine  Bioyraphie.  One  volume  has  just  appeared 
(1909),  entitled  Bismarcks  Jugend,  1815-18/f8.  One  may  hazard  the  con- 
jecture that  this,  when  completed,  will  be  the  most  satisfactory 
biography  in  German.  Ed.  Heyck,  Bismarck  in  Monographien  zur 
Welt  geschichte,  is  interestingly  illustrated.  Erich  Marcks'  Kaiser 
Wilhelm  I  (5th  edition,  1905)  is  admirable  in  knowledge,  criticism,  and 
temper,  an  indispensable  book  both  by  reason  of  its  presentation  and 
interpretation  of  the  Emperor's  career  and  his  relations  to  others, 
especially  to  Bismarck,  and  also  because  of  its  critical  bibliography. 

A  clear  account  of  the  Danish  and  Austro-Prussian  wars  may  be 
found  in  Murdock,  The  Reconstruction  of  Europe  (1894),  chaps.  XV- 
XXI.  HoziER,  H.  M.,  Seven  Weeks'  War,  is  readable,  founded  on  letters 
written  from  Bohemia  to  the  London  Times,  well  sujjplied  with  maps 
and  plans.  Sybel's  account  of  the  war  of  1866  is  in  vol.  V,  The  Found~ 
ing  of  the  German  Empire.  See,  also,  Friedjung,  Der  Kampf  um,  die 
Vorherrschaft,  vols.  I-II,  and  Gorce.  Ilisloire  du  Second  Empire,  vol. 
IV,  pp.  532-631;  vol.  V,  pp.  1-80. 


CHAPTER  XII 

The  Transformation  of  the  Second  Empire 

The  most  valuable  account  of  the  transformation  of  the  Second 
Empire  between  1860  and  1870  is  in  Gorge,  Histoire  du  Second  Empire, 
vol.  Ill,  livre  XXII,  and  vols.  IV  and  V.  Berton,  H.,  L'evolution  con- 
stitutionelle  du  Second  Empire  (1900),  parts  two  and  three,  is  also  full 
and  trustworthy;  an  important  monograph  by  a  French  lawyer.  For 
the  growth  of  the  republican  party:  Weill,  Histoire  du  parti  repu- 
blicain,  chaps.  XII-XV;  Tchernoff,  Le  parti  republicain  au  Covp  d'Etat 
et  sous  le  Second  Empire.  For  labor  movements:  Weill,  Histoire  du 
mouvement  social,  chaps.  III-VI;  for  relations  with  the  church:  Debidouk, 
L'Eglise  et  I'Etat  en  France,  pp.  551-627. 

CHAPTER  XIII 

The  Franco-German  War 

Palat,  Bibliographie  g^nSrale  de  la  guerre  de  1870-1871  (1896),  ia 
indispensable  for  any  detailed  study  of  this  period.  There  is  a  good 
account  of  the  causes  of  the  war  in  Rose,  Development  of  European 
Nations,  vol.  I,  chap.  I;  also  in  Walpole,  History  of  Twenty-five 
Years,  vol.  II,  chap.  VIII;  Headlam,  Bismarck,  chap.  XIII.  Vols.  VI 
and  VII  of  Sybel's  Founding  of  the  German  Empire  contain  an 
elaborate  account  of  the  events  and  diplomacy  of  the  period;  pronounced 
special  pleading.     These  volumes  have  not  the  value  of  the  earlier  ones, 


750  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

as  Bismarck  did  not  allow  the  author  access  to  the  Prussian  archives 
for  the  period  after  18(i7.  The  seventh  volume  was  comjjosed  under 
tlie  in.spiration  of  Bismarck  himself,  and  is  based  on  information  largely 
furnished  by  him.  Delbriick  says  it  is  "  not  history  but  diplomacy — and 
calculated  to  inspire  laughter  at  that."  (Delbruck,  Das  Geheimnlss  tier 
Napoleonischen  PoUtik,  p.  34).  Bismarck's  description  is  in  his  Reflec- 
tions and  Reminiscences,  chaps.  XX-XXIII.  Far  the  most  judicial,  as 
well  as  most  interesting  account  of  the  causes  of  the  war  and  of  the  war 
itself  (down  to  Sedan)  is  in  Gouge's  Histoire  du  Second  Empire,  vols. 
VI  and  VII,  volumes  of  absorbing  interest,  clear,  vivid,  admirably  ar- 
ranged, and  written  with  scrupulous  fairness.  Two  hundred  pages  of 
vol.  VI  are  given  to  the  HohenzoUern  candidacy.  An  earlier  but  very 
able  study  is  Sorel,  A.,  Histoire  diplomatique  de  la  guerre  franco- 
allemande,  2  vols.  (1875).  Ollivier's  L'Empire  liberal,  14  vols.,  in  course 
of  publication  (1895  - — ),  is  an  elaborate  account  of  the  Empire  by 
one  who  was  badly  compromised  by  the  war.  On  the  bearing  upon 
the  fall  of  the  Empire  of  Napoleon's  relations  to  the  Pope: 
Bourgeois  et  Clermoxt,  Rome  et  Napoleon  III,  is  important.  The 
authors  thesis  is  that  Napoleon's  refusal  to  withdraw  his  troops 
from  Rome  occasioned  the  failure  of  the  projected  triple  alliance  with 
Italy  and  Austria,  and  that  that^  was  the  cause  of  the  subsequent 
disasters.  See,  also,  DEsmouR,  L'Eglise  et  I'Etat  en  France,  pp.  551- 
627.  Debidour's  account  of  the  diplomacy  of  the  period  is  found 
in  his  Histoire  diplomatique,  vol.  II,  chaps.  VII-X.  The  numer- 
ous biographies  of  Bismarck,  cited  above,  should  be  consulted;  also 
Marcks,  Kaiser  Willielm  I.  Lord  Actox  has  a  study  of  the  causes 
of  the  Franco-Prussian  war  in  his  Historical  Essays  and  Studies  (1907), 
chap.  VII. 

Of  the  war  itself  there  is  a  good  account  in  Rose,  Development  of 
the  European  Nations,  vol.  I,  chaps.  II,  III,  and  IV;  also  in  Mtjrdock, 
Reconstruction  of  Europe,  chaps.  XXIII-XXX.  Gen.  J.  F.  Maurice, 
The  Franco-German  War,  is  a  translation  of  a  German  work,  edited  by 
Pflugk-Hartuxg,  entitled  Kriecj  und  Sieg  (1896);  Col.  L.  Hale's  The 
People's  War  in  France  (1904)  is  founded  on  Hoxig,  Der  Volkskrieg  an 
der  Loire,  and  describes  the  latter  part  of  the  war,  after  Sedan. 
MoLTKE,  The  Franco-German  War  is  important  but  technical.  Chuquet, 
La  guerre  de  1870-1871  (1895),  is  an  excellent  account  in  a  single 
volume.  The  extensive  histories  by  the  German  General  Staif  and  by 
Lehautcourt  are  too  detailed  and  technical  for  general  use.  Probably 
the  best  account  for  the  general  reader  is  Gorge,  Histoire  du  Second 
Empire,  vol.  VI,  pp.  321-434,  and  VII  throughout  (comes  down  to 
September  4,  1870).  E.  B.  Washbuuxe,  Recollections  of  a  Minister  to 
France,  2  vols.  (1887),  a  very  interesting  and  important  book  by  the 
United  States  Minis';2r  to  France,  the  only  foreign  minister  who  re- 
mained at  his  post  in  Paris  throughout  the  Franco-German  war,  and 
whose  firm  conduct  won  the  praise  of  William  I,  Bismarck,  Gambetta, 
and  Thiers.  There  was  published  by  the  Government  Printing  Office, 
1878,  Senate  Executive  Document  No.  24,  a  book  of  222  pages  entitled 
Franco-German  War  and  the  Insurrection  of  the  Commune.  Corre- 
spondence of  E.  B.  Washburne.  This  includes  the  correspondence  of 
Washburne  with  the  State  Department  in  Washington  in  relation  to 
the  war,  together  with  correspondence  with  Bismarck,  Bancroft,  United 
States  Minister  to  Berlin,  and  Motley,  United  States  Minister  to  London. 
The  letters  cover  the  period  from  July  19,  1870,  to  June  29,  1871. 
Interesting  volumes  are  Busgh,  Bismarck  in  the  Franco-German  War;  A. 
Forbes,  3/j/  Experiences  in  the  War  Between  France  and  Germany  (1872) ; 
W.  H.  Russell,  My  Diary  During  the  Last  Great  War  (1874);  Bis- 
marck's Letters  to  His  Wife  from  the  Seat  of  War  (1870-1871),  trans- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  751 

lated  by  A.  Harder  (1903);  Diaries  of  Emperor  Frederick,  During  the 
Campaigns  of  1S66  and  1870-1871,  translated  by  F.  A.  Welby  (1902); 
Henry  Laboucheue,  Diary  of  the  Besieged  Resident  in  Paris  (1871); 
Sir  Edwin  Arnold,  Inside  Paris  Dtiring  the  Siege  (1871);  Jules 
Claretie,  Paris  asslegS;  ¥.  Sarcey,  Le  sidge  de  Paris.  This  attained  its 
thirtieth  edition  within  its  first  year.  See,  Thiers,  Notes  et  Souvenirs,  on 
the  years  1870-1873  (1903),  for  an  account  of  Thiers'  attempts  to 
secure  the  intervention  of  foreign  powers. 

CHAPTER  XIV 
The  German  Empire 

There  is  in  English  no  general  history  of  Germany  since  1871.  The 
treatment  in  Andrews,  Contemporary  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa,  is 
excellent.  That  in  Rose,  Development  of  European  Nations,  vol.  I,  chap. 
VI;  and  vol.  II,  chap.  I,  is  slight;  that  in  Headlam,  Bismarck,  pp.  377- 
463,  good.  Lowell,  A.  L.,  Governments  and  Parties  in  Continental 
Europe,  vol.  II,  chap.  VII,  gives  a  clear  outline  of  party  history  from 
1871  to  1894.  The  most  extensive  account  is  H.  Blum,  Das  deutsche 
Reich  zur  Zeit  Bismarcks,  covering  the  years  1871-1890  (1893),  a  book 
largely  inspired  by  Bismarck  himself.  Oncken's  Das  Zeitalter  des 
Kaisers  Wilhelm  I,  vol.  II,  pp.  369-7C8,  952-1005,  comes  down  to  1888. 
Bulle,  Oeschichte  der  Jahre  1871-1877,  is  useful.  Kaufmann,  Politische 
Geschichte  Deutschlands,  covers  the  period  from  1870-1888  very  poorly. 
Probably  the  most  useful  and  readable  account  is  in  Matter,  Bismarck 
et  son  temps,  vol.  Ill,  a  book  based  on  wide  and  careful  investigation, 
impartial  in  tone,  an  interesting  narrative.  The  writings  of  Marcks  and 
Lenz,  cited  above,  should  be  used.  Bismarck's  Reflections  and 
Reminiscences,  vol.  II,  chaps.  XXIV-XXXIII,  concern  the  period  1871- 
1888.  The  Memoirs  of  Prince  Chlodwig  of  Hohenlohe-SchilUngsfuerst, 
2  vols.  (1906),  are  of  importance.  Hohenlohe  was  head  of  the  Bavarian 
ministry  1866-1870,  German  ambassador  to  Paris  1874-1885,  and  Chancel- 
lor of  the  Empire  1894-1900.  The  Memoirs  throw  light  upon  the  relations 
between  the  South  German  States  and  the  North  German  Confederation, 
upon  the  conflict  with  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  upon  French 
politics  from  1874  to  1885.  Of  slight  importance  for  the  period  after 
1890. 

On  the  Kulturkampf:  Hahn,  Oeschichte  des  Kulturkampfes;  on 
Social  Democracy:  E.  Milhaud,  La  D&mocratie  socialiste  allemande 
(1903);  KiRKUP,  History  of  Socialism  (1906),  chaps.  V,  VII,  IX 
(contains  Erfurt  programme  in  full,  pp.  223-229) ;  Werner  Sombart, 
Socialism  (1898);  A.  Schaeffle,  The  Quintessence  of  Socialism;  W.  H. 
Dawson,  Bismarck  and  State  Socialism  (1891);  on  protection: 
W.  H.  Dawson,  Protection  in  Germany,  A  History  of  German 
Fiscal  Policy  During  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1904),  the  best  book 
in  English  on  the  subject,  coming  down  to  the  tariff  of  1902;  on  state 
insurance:  F.  W.  Lewis,  State  Insurance,  chap.  IV  (Boston,  1909);  also, 
J.  G.  Brooks,  Compulsory  Insurance  in  Germany;  Ludwig  Lass,  German 
Workmen's  Insurance;  on  government:  B.  E.  Howard,  The  German 
Empire  (1906),  an  exhaustive  account  of  the  structure  of  the  imperial 
government,  not  a  description  of  the  manner  in  which  it  works,  a  jurid- 
ical rather  than  an  historical  study;  Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties, 
chaps.  V,  VI,  VII,  an  account  of  both  structure  and  operation  of  im- 
perial and  state  governments;  Combes  de  Lestrade,  Les  monarchies  de 
V empire  allemand,  organisation  constitutionelle  et  administrative  (1904); 
probably  the  best,  most  complete  account  of  German  governments,  im- 
perial   and   state;    describes    the   powers    and    functions    of   sovereigns, 


752  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

chambers,  ministers,  communes,  financial  and  judicial  s^/stems,  etc.; 
Charles  Borgeaud,  The  Adoption  and  Amendment  of  Constitutions  in 
Europe  and  America,  translated  by  C.  D.  Hazen  (1895),  pp.  47-78. 
Kloeppel,  p.,  Dreissiy  Jahre  deutscher  Verfassungsgeschichte,  1867-1897; 
vol.  I  (1900)  covers  period  to  1877;  Laband,  P.,  Das  Staatsrecht  des 
deutschen  Reiches,  4  vols.  (4th  edit.,  1901),  a  very  important  worli  on 
German  public  law.  Has  been  translated  into  French.  The  most  in- 
forming book  on  present  day  Germany  is  W.  H.  Dawson's  The  Evolution 
of  Modern  Germany  (1908),  a  book  that  aims  to  trace  the  economic  and 
social  transformation  of  Germany,  her  industrial  and  colonial  expansion, 
the  growth  of  socialism,  etc.  See,  also,  E.  D.  Howard,  The  Recent  Indus- 
trial Prof/ress  of  Germany  (1907);  "Veritas,"  The  German  Empire  of 
To-day  (1903);  Eltzbacher,  O.  (or  J.  Ellis  Barker),  Modern  Germany, 
Her  Political  and  Economic  Problems   (1905). 


CHAPTER  XV 
The  Third  Republic 

There  is  no  satisfactory  history  of  the  Third  Republic  in  English. 
Lowell,  Governments  and  Parties,  chap.  II,  has  a  clear  outline  of  party 
history  down  to  1896.  Coubertin,  Evolution  of  the  Third  Republic,  is 
not  always  clear,  presupposes  some  knowledge  of  the  subject,  contains 
chapters  on  education,  the  army,  literature,  socialism;  is  poorly 
translated.  F.  Lawton,  The  Third  French  Republic  (1909),  covers  in  a 
superficial  way  the  years  1871-1906,  and  has  entertaining  chapters  on 
literature,  science,  art,  education,  the  parliamentary  system.  W.  G. 
Berry,  France  since  Waterloo  (1909),  devotes  pages  249-368  to  the 
years  1871-1908.  A  work  of  great  importance,  detailed,  authoritative, 
and  brilliantly  written  is  Haxotaux,  Contemporary  France,  4  vols.  (1903- 
1909),  covering  the  years  1871-1882,  a  full  narrative,  abounding  in  vivid 
and  instructive  accounts  of  men  and  events.  Zevort,  E.,  Histoire  de  la 
Troisieme  Rcpublique,  4  vols.  (1896-1901),  covers  the  years  1870-1894,  a 
useful  narrative,  full  of  detail,  fair,  careful,  pleasantly  written. 
Labusquiere,  La  Troisieme  Republique,  1871-1900,  is  vol.  XII  of 
Jaures,  Histoire  Socialiste.  F.  T.  Marzials,  Life  of  L6on  Gambetta  in 
the  Statesmen  Series  (London,  1890),  is  a  brief  account.  Charles  de 
Mazade,  Monsieur  Thiers,  Cinquante  annces  d'histoire  contemporaine 
(1884),  is  an  interesting  book.  More  important  is  the  life  of  Jules  Ferry 
by  Alfred  Rambaud  (Paris,  1903),  a  biography  of  a  forceful  and  far- 
sighted  statesman,  a  founder  of  the  Republic,  written  by  a  trained  his- 
torian. See,  also,  Henry  Leyret,  Waldeck-Bousseau  et  la  TroisiSme 
Republique,  1869-1899. 

On  protection:  see,  H.  O.  Meredith,  Protection  in  France;  on  labor 
and  social  movements:  G.  Weill,  Histoire  du  mouvement  social  en 
France,  1852-1902  (1905),  pp.  133-472,  with  bibliography;  on  diplomatic 
history:  Hippeau,  Histoire  diplomatique  de  la  Troisihne  Republique 
(1888);  A.  Tardieu,  France  and  the  Alliances  (1908);  Billot,  M.  A., 
La  France  et  I'ltalie,  Histoire  des  annces  troubles  (1905);  the  author 
was  French  ambassador  in  Rome,  and  treats  of  the  period  between  1881 
and  1899 — useful  for  French  history,  also  for  Italian;  on  colonial  ex- 
pansion: Levasseur,  La  France  et  ses  colonies,  3  vols.  (1889);  L.  Vigxon, 
L'expansion  de  la  France  (1891),  and  by  the  same  author,  Les  colonies 
franqaises,  leur  commerce,  lenr  situation  economique,  leur  utility  pour 
la  metropole,  leur  avenir  (1886),  containing  a  description  of  the  dif- 
ferent French  colonies;  Dubois  et  Terrier,  Les  colonies  franqaises: 
un  si^cle  d'expansion  coloniale,  1800-1900  (1902) ;  on  the  Dreyfus  case; 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  753 

Reinach,  J.,  L'affaire  Dreyfus,  5  vols.  1901-1902;  also  by  Dreyfus  him- 
self, Five  Years  of  My  Life  (1901);  Steevens,  The  Tragedy  of  Dreyfus 
(1899). 

On  state  and  church:  Arthur  Galton,  Church  and  State  in  France, 
1300-1907,  pp.  201-268.  ^Of  the  first  importance  is  Debidour,  A., 
L'Eglise  Cathollque  et  L'Etat  sous  la  Troisidm  ■'■  KcjnibUque,  1870-1906, 
2  vols.  (Paris,  1906-1909).  Vol.  I  covers  the  period  1870-1889;  vol.  II, 
1889-1906;  the  fullest  account  concerning  the  separation  of  Church  and 
State  to  be  found  is  in  vol.  II,  pp.  231-498;  excellent  bibliographies;  many 
important  documents,  including  the  law  of  April  13,  1908,  modifying 
certain  articles  of  the  law  of  Decemljer  9,  1905.  See,  also,  Briand,  A., 
La  Separation  des  Eglises  et  de  VEtat.  Rapport  fait  au  nom  de  la 
Commission  de  la  Chambre  des  Deputes,  suivies  des  pieces  annexes 
(1905).  On  the  government  of  France,  the  best  description  in  English 
is  Lowell's  Governments  and  Parties,  chaps.  I  and  II.  This  is  far 
superior  to  Bodij:y,  J.  S.  C,  France,  2  vols.  (1898),  a  pretentious  book 
which,  with  much  information,  is  dominated  by  the  melancholy  thesis 
that  parliamentary  government  is  unsuccessful  in  France,  because  it 
is  not  the  same  as  parliamentary  government  in  England.  The  book 
contains  many  other  preconceptions,  more  entertaining  than  important. 
Lebon  and  Pelet,  France  as  It  Is  (1888),  is  a  useful  book.  George,  W. 
L.,  France  in  the  Twentieth  Century  (1909),  contains  chapters  on  the  politi- 
cal institutions,  relations  of  church  and  state,  socialism,  trades-imionism, 
colonies,  education,  etc.,  of  France  of  the  present  day.  A  penetrating 
analysis  of  the  French  mind  and  character  and  description  of  French 
conditions  is  W.  C.  Brownell's  French  Traits,  an  Essay  in  Comparative 
Criticism  (1889).  Useful  collections  of  the  constitutions  of  France  are: 
DuGuiT  et  MoNNiER,  Lcs  constitutions  et  les  principales  lois  politiques  de 
la  France  dcpuis  1789  (2nd  edit.,  1908) ;  Helie,  F.  A.,  Les  constitutions 
de  la  France  (1880).  Professor  F.  M.  Anderson  has  rendered  an  im- 
portant service  to  students  by  translating  many  of  the  important 
documents  in  the  history  of  nineteenth  century  France  in  his  Con- 
stitutions and  Documents  (2nd  edit.,  revised  and  enlarged,  1909). 
Pellisson,  Les  orateurs  politiques  de  la  France  de  1830  a  nos  jours, 
pp.  381-434;  contains  extracts  illustrating  the  history  of  the  Third 
Hepublic  from  1871  to  1889. 


CHAPTER  XVI 
The  Kingdom  of  Italy 

The  literature  on  this  period  of  Italian  history  is  not  extensive'. 
Stillman's  historj'  may  be  used;  pages  358  to  393  cover  the  years  1871 
to  1886.  Lowell's  account  of  party  history  down  to  1896  is  clear  and 
his  description  of  the  political  institutions  adequate.  Governments  and 
Parties,  vol.  I,  chaps.  Ill  and  IV.  Sthlman's  Francesco  Crispi  (1899) 
and  Justin  McCarthy's  Pope  Leo  XIII  (1896)  are  useful  biographies. 
A.  Billot,  La  France  et  Vltalie,  1881-1899,  2  vols.  (1905),  a  book  by  a 
former  French  ambassador  to  Italy.  For  present  conditions  in  Italy: 
see,  King  and  Okey,  Italy  To-day  (2nd  edit,  1909) ;  W.  R.  Thayer, 
Italica  (1908),  containing  an  essay  on  "Thirty  Years  of  Italian 
Progress,"  and  one  on  "Italy  in  1907";  En  Driault,  Les  probUm,es 
politiques  et  sociaux  a  la  fin  du  XIX&  sikcle  (1900),  chap.  II,  La  ques- 
tion romaine:  le  pape,  le  roi,  le  peuple. 

The  Encyclopedia  Americana  contains  more  than  thirty  articles,  mostly 
by  Italian  specialists,  on  various  Italian  institutions  and  conditions. 


754  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

CHAPTER  XVII 
Austria-Hungary  Since  1849 

On  Austria  and  Hungary,  there  is  very  little  that  is  important  in 
English.  Leger,  L.,  History  of  Austro-Hungary  (1889),  chaps.  XXXIII- 
XXX VI 11,  is  probably  the  most  satisfactory  treatment.  Whitman,  S., 
Austria  (Story  of  tlie  Nations  Series),  gives  a  brief  account  of  the 
period  from  1815  to  1898,  pp.  308-381.  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol. 
XI,  chap.  XV,  contains  an  account  of  the  reaction  and  reorganization  in 
Austria,  Prussia,  and  the  German  Confederation,  by  Professor  Fried- 
JUNG,  of  the  University  of  Vienna.  Consult,  also.  Ibid.  chap.  XVI. 
Seignobos  has  useful  chapters.  Vajibery,  A.,  The  Story  of  Hungary 
(The  Story  of  the  Nations  Series,  1886),  pp.  400-440.  Florence 
Arnold  Fouster,  Francis  Decik,  A  Memoir,  first  published  anonymously 
(1880),  is  important  for  the  period  1840  to  1876.  Sir  Horace  Rum- 
bold's  Francis  Joseph  and  His  Times  (1909)  is  an  interesting  and  vivid 
account  of  this  reign.  The  author  was  long  British  ambassador  at 
Vienna.  His  book  is  useful,  though  frequently  superficial  and  biased. 
Rumbold  has,  however,  made  much  use  of  the  solid  works  of  Friedjung. 

The  most  important  work  on  Austria  after  1848  is  H.  Friedjung, 
Oesterreich  von  1848  bis  1860,  of  which  vol.  I,  Die  Jahre  der  Revolution 
und  der  Reform,,  1848-1851,  has  appeared  (3rd  edit.,  Stuttgart,  1908). 
L..  Eisenmann,  Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois,  is  very  valuable:  on 
the  period  of  reaction,  1849-1859,  see  pp.  149-203;  on  the  various  at- 
tempts at  constitution-making,  the  struggle  over  the  unitary  and  federal 
principles,  see  Ibid.,  pp  207-399.  See,  also,  Dedk,  A  Memoir,  passim;  A.  de 
Bertha,  La  Hongrie  moderne,  de  1849  a  1901  (Paris,  1901),  a  book 
by  a  native  of  Hungary,  laudatory  of  men  and  things  Hungarian,  yet 
well-informed  and  useful.  Chap.  I  describes  Hungary  under  Austrian 
absolutism,  1849-1859;  chap.  II,  Hungary  under  the  provisional  schemes, 
1859-1865.  H.  Friedjung,  Der  Kampf  um  die  Vorherrschaft  in  Deutsch- 
land,  is  invaluable  for  the  period  1859-1866.  On  the  making  of  the 
Ausgleich,  1865-1867:  see,  Eisenmann,  Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois, 
pp.  403-657;  Forster,  Dedk,  A  Memoir,  pp.  113-322;  Bertha,  La  Hongrie 
moderne,  chap.  HI,  pp.  83-160;  see,  also,  Bertha,  La  constitution 
hongroise  (Paris,  1898),  a  good  outline  and  description  containing  chap- 
ters on  the  laws  of  1848,  on  the  attempts  at  centralization,  on  dualism,  on 
Croatia,  the  nationalities,  development  from  1867-1897;  see,  also,  M.  G. 
Horn,  Le  compromis  de  1868  entre  la  Hongrie  et  laCroatie  (Paris,  1907). 
Bertha  also  has  a  book  on  Frangois  Joseph  I  et  son  r^gne,  1848-1888 
(Paris,  1888).  See,  also,  Beust,  Aus  drei  Viertel-Jahrhunderten,  vols. 
I  and  II  (Stuttgart,  1887).  On  the  working  of  the  Ausgleich;  Eisen- 
mann, Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois,  pp.  659-680;  on  history  of 
Hungary,  1867-1901:  Bertha,  La  Hongrie  moderne,  pp.  161-358.  A 
clear  and  instructive  account  of  party  history  in  Austria-Hungary  from 
1867  to  1896,  and  a  description  of  the  political  institutions  of  each 
countrj^,  and  of  the  Dual  Monarchy,  is  given  by  Lowell  in  Governments 
and  Parties,  vol.  II,  chaps.  VIII-X.  The  fullest  account  of  Bohemia  in 
the  nineteenth  century  is  to  be  found  in  E.  Denis,  La  Boheme  depuis  la 
Montagne-Blanche,  2  vols.  (Paris,  1903) ;  vol.  II,  pp.  381-670,  covers  the 
period  from  1850  to  1901. 

For  descriptions  of  contemporary  Austria  and  Hungary:  Geoffrey 
Drage,  Austria-Hungary  (1909);  Scotus-Viator  (R.  W.  Seton-Watson), 
The  Future  of  the  Hungarian  Nation  (1908),  and  (by  the  same  author) 
Racial  Problems  in  Hungary  (1908) ;  A.  R.  Colquhoun,  The  Whirlpool 
of  Europe  (1907).  A  careful,  scientific  study  of  the  races  and  nationalities 
in   the   dual   monarchy   is   Auerbach,   Les   races   et    les   nationalites   en 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  755 

Autriche-Hongrie  (1898).  The  leading  authority  on  Austrian  public 
law  is  Ulbrich,  J.,  Oesterreiches  Staatsrecht  (3rd  edit.,  Tubingen,  1904). 
See,  also,  for  general  conditions:  Andre  Cheradame,  L'Europe  et  la 
question  d'Autriche  au  seuil  du  XXe  sUcle  (Paris,  1901,  452  pp.) ; 
Driault,  Le  monde  actuel  (1909),  chap.  III. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

England  to  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832 

The  best  bibliographies  on  English  history  during  the  nineteenth 
century  are  in  vols.  XI  and  XII  of  Hunt  and  Poole's  Political  History 
of  England.  These  are  arranged  under  topics  and  are  not  mere  lists 
of  titles  but  are  critical  and  descriptive,  and  constitute  a  very  valuable 
guide.  There  are  lists,  without  criticism,  in  connection  with  the  various 
chapters  of  the  Cambridge  Modern  History.  Traill,  Social  England, 
vol.  VI,  contains  useful  bibliographies  on  many  subjects  not  included  in 
the  preceding  lists,  such  as  literature,  arts,  sciences,  industries,  social 
life,  etc.  One  can  find  source  material  in  a  form  available  for  class  use 
in  Cheyney,  Readings  in  English  History  Draion  from  the  Original 
Sources  (1908),  pp.  663-767;  Adams  and  Stephens,  Select  Documents  of 
English  Constitutional  History  (1901),  pp.  507-555;  Robinson  and 
Beard,  Readings  in  Modern  European  History  (1909),  vol.  II,  pp.  239- 
337;  Kendall,  Source-Book  of  English  History  (1900),  pp.  381-465; 
Lee,  Source-Book  of  English  History  (1900),  pp.  497-585.  The 
fullest  and  most  informing  general  history  of  this  period  is 
Walpole,  History  of  England  Since  1815  (1890),  reaching  to  1856,  a 
work  of  solid  scholarship  and  abundantly  supplied  with  references  to 
authorities;  indispensable.  Molesworth,  History  of  England,  3  vols.,  is 
particularly  full  on  the  reform  movements;  account  of  the  reform  of 
1832  exceptionally  good.  Brodrick  and  Fotheringham,  vol.  XI,  in 
Hunt  and  Poole,  The  Political  History  of  England,  covering  years 
1801-1837,  a  book  marked  by  good  judgment  and  accuracy,  but  over- 
loaded with  detail,  a  clear,  substantial,  and  dry  resume.  See,  also, 
Bright,  History  of  England,  vol.  Ill;  Traill,  Social  England,  vol.  VI, 
illustrated  edit.,  more  an  encyclopedia  of  history  than  a  history  itself, 
with  articles  by  specialists  on  many  different  departments  of  the  national 
life,  religion,  laws,  learning,  arts,  industry,  commerce,  manners.  The 
political  sections  are  the  least  satisfactory.  The  illustrations  are 
numerous  and  admirable.  Oman,  England  in  the  Nineteenth  Century 
(1899),  a  sketch  of  no  great  importance,  readable  but  not  always  im- 
partial. On  Catholic  Emancipation:  see,  Bryce,  Tido  Centimes  of  Irish 
History,  pp.  272-314;  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  Leaders  of  Public  Opinion  in 
Ireland,  2  vols,  (new  edit.,  1903).  Vol.  II  is  a  life  of  O'Connell;  Shaw- 
Lefevue,  G.  J.,  Peel  and  O'Connell.  A  Revieic  of  the  Irish  Policy  of 
Parliament  from  the  Union  to  the  Death  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  (1887), 
pp.  1-13;  Parker,  C.  S.,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  3  vols.  (1899);  vol.  I,  chaps, 
IX-XII;  vol.  II,  chaps.  III-V.  On  the  movement  for  parliamentary 
reform:  see,  Molesworth,  History  of  England,  vol.  I;  McCarthy,  Epoch 
of  Reform,  a  convenient  and  clear,  brief  account;  Rose,  J.  H.,  The  Rise 
and  Growth  of  Democracy  in  Great  Britain  (1898),  chaps.  I  and  II. 
An  indispensable  work  for  the  understanding  of  the  political  system  of 
England  before  the  Reform  Bill  is  Porritt,  E.  and  A.  G.,  The  Un- 
re formed  House  of  Commons,  2  vols.  (1903),  a  clear,  full,  authoritative 
description  of  the  representative  system  in  England,  not  at  all  a  de- 
scription of  the  Reform  itself.  On  the  Reform:  consult,  also,  Walpole, 
Life  of  Lord  John  Russell,  and  Stuart  Reid,  Life  and  Letters  of  Lord 


756  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Durham,  2  vols.  (1906).  Books  important  for  understanding  the  move- 
ment of  ideas  are  Kent,  C.  B.  II.,  The  Emjlish  Radicals  (1899);  Sir 
Lksi.ie  Stki'hen,  The  English  Utilitarians  (1900),  both  vahiable  for  the 
history  of  the  radical  party;  Dicey,  A.  V.,  Lectures  on  the  Relation  Be- 
tween Law  and  Public  Opinion  in  England  During  the  Nineteenth 
Century  (1905),  a  masterly  exposition,  commentary,  and  criticism;  in- 
dispensable for  the  history  of  the  whole  century;  contains  an  admirable 
statement  of  the  influence  of  Bentham  upon  the  legislation;  valuable 
footnotes.  On  the  foreign  policy  of  Canning,  the  recent  Life  of  Canning 
by  H.  W.  V.  Temperley  (1903)  is  useful.  Though  written  from  the 
point  of  view  of  an  advocate  and  defender,  chaps.  VIII-XII  contain 
some  new  material  on  England  and  the  Holy  Alliance,  the  Congresses, 
America,  and  Greece.  Stapleton's  older  Political  Life  of  George  Canr- 
ning,  3  vols.  (1831),  is  very  valuable  for  foreign  relations.  W.  Cun- 
ningham, The  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce  in  Modern 
Times,  3  vols.,  is  best  on  the  period  before  the  nineteenth  century.  Vol. 
Ill,  covering  period  from  1776-1850,  does  little  mora  than  touch  on 
general  aspects.  Important  matters  are  treated  very  slightly^as,  for 
instance,  the  work  of  Huskisson. 

CHAPTER  XIX 
England  Between  Two  Reforms 

On  this  period,  Walpole,  History  of  England  Since  1815,  remains  the 
most  important  account.  Vols.  IH,  IV,  V,  and  VI  cover  the  period 
from  1833-1856;  and  the  same  author  brings  his  narrative  down  to  1880 
in  his  History  of  Twenty-five  Years,  ^  vols.  (1904-1908),  of  which  vols.  I 
and  II  concern  the  period  treated  in  this  chapter.  Molesworth's  History 
of  England  and  Traill's  Social  England,  vol.  VI,  continue  useful.  The 
volume  by  Low  and  Sanders  in  the  Political  History  of  England  covers 
the  whole  reign  of  Victoria  (1837-1901),  and  is  the  best  single  volume 
on  the  subject.  It  is  a  clear,  solid,  and  substantial  history  of  political 
warfare  and  parliamentary  proceedings,  but  is  colorless  and  overloaded 
with  details.  Its  critical  bibliography  is  a  very  useful  feature  of  the 
book.  Justin  McCarthy,  History  of  Our  Oxen  Times,  covers  the  Queen's 
reign  in  5  vols.,  is  written  by  a  journalist  and  active  politician,  is  very 
readable,  interesting  for  its  portraits  of  important  persons  and  its  de- 
scription of  events,  but  is  diffuse  and  sometimes  trivial.  McCarthy,  J., 
Short  History  of  Our  Own  Times  (1908),  1  vol.,  treats  the  entire  reign. 
Herbert  Paul,  A  History  of  Modern  England,  5  vols.  (1904-1906), 
covers  the  years  from  1846  to  1895,  is  a  direct  and  vivid  narrative, 
limited  larg'ely  to  parliamentary  proceedings,  with,  however,  chapters 
on  literature  and  theology  and  ecclesiastical  disputes;  no  treatment  of 
social  and  economic  problems  and  changes;  written  with  dash  and  em- 
phasis, always  confident,  frequently  partisan;  standpoint  that  of  a 
Gladstonian  Liberal. 

The  biographical  literature  on  this  period  is  very  extensive.  The  best 
life  of  Queen  Victoria  is  by  Sidney  Lee  (1903);  contains  an  excellent 
bibliography.  Of  very  great  value  are  The  Letters  of  Queen  Victoria, 
edited  by  Benson  and  Fisher,  in  3  vols.  (1907).  There  are  two  editions 
of  this  work,  one  costing  three  pounds,  the  other  costing  six  shillings, 
the  latter  not  sold,  at  present,  in  the  United  States.  This  is  a  selection 
from  the  Queen's  correspondence  between  the  years  1837  and  1861,  very 
important  as  proving  the  Queen's  ability  and  worth,  her  seriousness  and 
intelligence  as  a  ruler;  also,  as  throwing  much  light  on  the  characters 
and  conduct  of  important  statesmen,  Melbourne,  Peel,  Palmerston,  Rus- 
sell, and  others.    A  work  of  great  historical  significance. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  757 

Brief  biographies  of  the  leading  statesmen  of  the  realm  are  con- 
tained in  the  series  called  The  Prime  Ministers  of  Queen  Victoria, 
edited  by  Stuart  J.  Reid,  a  volume  devoted  to  each.  Morley's  Life  of 
W.  E.  Gladstone,  3  vols.  (1903),  and  Life  of  Richard  Cobden  (1881); 
Dalling's  and  Ashley's  Life  of  Palmerston  (1879);  Robertson's  Life  of 
John  Bright  (1889);  Walpole's  Life  of  Lord  John  Russell,  2  vols. 
(1879);  S.  J.  llEn)'s  Lord  John  Russell  (1895);  Rosebery's  Sir  Robert 
Peel  (1899);  Sir  T.  Martin's  Life  of  the  Prince  Consort,  5  vols.  (1874- 
1880) ;  Hoduer's  Life  of  the  Seventh  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  3  vols.  (1886) ; 
Frank  Podmore's  Life  of  Robert  Owen,  2  vols.  (1901));  and  Graham 
Wallas's  Life  of  Francis  Place  (1891),  are  among  the  most  useful 
biographies   on   the   period. 

On  Chartism:  see,  R.  G.  Gabimage,  History  of  Chartism  (1894); 
Carlyle,  T.,  Chartism;  Rose,  The  Rise  of  Democracy,  chaps.  VI,  VII, 
and  VIII;  Thomas  Cooper's  Life,  Written  by  Himself  (1872).  On  Free 
Trade  movement:  Aumitage-Smitii,  The  Free  Trade  Movement  (1898); 
Morley,  Life  of  Cobden;  Disraeli,  Life  of  Sir  George  Bentinck; 
Parker,  C.  S.,  Sir  Robert  Peel,  3  vols.  (1899),  vol.  Ill,  an  important  col- 
lection of  Peel's  corres2)ondence ;  also,  Memoirs  of  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
2  vols.  (1856-1857).  See,  also,  J.  S.  Nicholson,  History  of  the  English 
Corn  Laws  (1904).  On  factory  legislation:  B.  L.  Hutchins  and  L. 
Harrison,  History  of  Factory  Legislation  (1903).  On  the  American 
Civil  War:  see,  Walpole,  History  of  Twenty-five  Years,  vol.  II,  chap. 
VIII.  On  constitutional  questions:  see.  Sir  Thomas  Erskine  May,  Con- 
stitutional History  of  England;  Taswell-Lanomead,  English  Constitu- 
tional History. 


CHAPTER  XX 

England  Under  Gladstone  and  Disraeli 

For  this  period,  the  general  histories  are:  Walpole,  History  of 
Twenty-five  Years,  vols.  II,  III,  and  IV  (coming  down  to  1880);  Paul, 
History  of  Modern  Em/land,  vols.  Ill  and  IV;  Bright,  History  of 
England,  vol.  IV,  pp.  450-577;  vol.  V,  pp.  1-87;  McCarthy,  History  of 
Oxir  Own  Times,  vols.  II  and  III;  Low  and  Sanders,  pp.  223-376; 
Traill's  Social  England.  Morley's  Life  of  Gladstone  is  indispensable, 
written  by  a  close  personal  friend,  an  experienced  politician,  and  a 
master  of  historical  prose.  Fitzmaurice,  Life  of  Earl  Granville,  2  vols. 
(1905),  vol.  II;  and  Winston  Churchill,  Lord  Randolph  Churchill, 
2  vols.  (1906),  are  important  for  the  period.  There  is  unfortunately  no 
satisfactory  life  of  Lord  Beaconsfield.  Froude's  biography  in  the 
Queen's  Prime  Ministers  series,  is  brief,  superficial,  and  is  very  poor 
on  the  administration  1874-1880.  Bryce  has  an  essay  on  Lord 
Beaconsfield  in  his  Studies  in  Contemporary  Biography  (1903),  and 
Sir  Spencer  Walpole  one  in  his  Studies  in  Biography  (1907).  T.  S. 
Kebbel,  Selected  Speeches  of  the  Earl  of  Beaconsfield,  2  vols.  (1882), 
is  useful.  On  Ireland:  see,  Johnston  and  Spencer,  Ireland's  Story; 
Bryce,  J.,  editor.  Two  Centuries  of  Irish  History  (1888);  J. 
McCarthy,  Ireland  and  Her  Story;  William  O'Connor  Morris, 
Ireland,  1798-1898  (1898);  W.  P.  O'Brien,  The  Great  Famine  (1896); 
R.  B.  O'Brien,  Parliamentary  History  of  the  Irish  Land  Ques- 
tion (1880),  Fifty  Years  of  Concessions  to  Ireland,  2  vols.  (1883-1885), 
Irish  Wrongs  and  English  Remedies  (1887).  G.  Shaw-Lefevre,  English 
and  Irish  Land  Questions  (1881),  contains  a  study  of  the  Bright  Clauses 
of  the  Land  Act  of  1870,  pp.  115-165.  A.  G.  Richey,  The  Irish  Land 
Laws  (1880),  discusses  at  length  the  Land  Act  of  1870. 


758  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

CHAPTER  XXI 
England  Since  1886 

The  most  satisfactory  account  of  recent  English  history  is  J.  F. 
Bright,  History  of  England,  vol.  V,  1880-1901,  a  book  of  solid  merits; 
clearness  of  arrangement,  directness  of  narrative,  and  remarkable  free- 
dom from  partisanship.  For  the  period  of  this  chapter;  see,  also.  Low 
and  Sanders,  pp.  366-489;  Paul,  Modern  England,  vol.  V;  McCarthy. 
Our  Own  Times,  vol.  Ill,  chaps.  X-XXV.  Of  the  first  im 
portance  for  the  Home  Rule  bills  is  Morley,  Life  of  Gladstone,  vol. 
Ill,  a  book  that  by  reason  of  Morley's  intimacy  with  Gladstone  at  this 
time  has  practically  the  value  of  a  source;  see,  also,  Churchill's  Lord 
Randolph  Churchill,  vol.  II,  and  Fitzmaurice's  Life  of  Earl  Granville, 
vol.  II,  chaps.  XIII-XIV,  authoritative  biographies,  based  on  letters 
and  documents.  Churchill's  great  influence  on  the  Conservative  party  is 
clearly  shown  by  the  former.  Consult,  also,  R.  B.  O'Brien,  Life  of 
Charles  Stewart  Parnell,  3  vols.  (1898).  Interesting  personal  descrip- 
tions and  appreciations  of  Gladstone  are  Jabies  Bryce,  William  Eivart 
Gladstone,  in  his  Studies  in  Contemporary  Biography  (also  published 
separately  as  a  booklet),  and  Sir  E.  W.  Hamilton,  Mr.  Gladstone,  a 
Monograph  (1898).  Lord  Rosebery,  Lord  Randolph  Churchill  (1898), 
is  also  suggestive.  Traill,  Life  of  the  Marquis  of  Salisbury,  contains 
practically  nothing  after  1886.  H.  Whates,  The  Third  Salisbury  Ad- 
viinistration  (1895-1900),  is  a  useful  book,  containing  maps  and  diplo- 
matic papers  bearing  on  the  South  African  war. 

On  Ireland,  a  very  important  monograph  is  L.  Paul  Dubois,  Con- 
temporary Ireland  (1908).  This  is  an  English  translation  of  L'Irlande 
contemporaine  (Paris,  1907).  Paul  Dubois  was  the  son-in-law  of  Taine. 
His  book  is  largely  historical  and  is  useful  for  the  whole  nineteenth 
century.  It  contains  a  full  discussion  of  the  land  question,  and  educa- 
tional, economic,  and   religious   problems. 

On  the  revived  interest  in  the  question  of  Protection  and  Free  Trade: 
see,  G.  Armitage-Smith,  The  Free  Trade  Movement  and  Its  Results 
(1898);  W.  Smart,  The  Return  of  Protection  (1903);  W.  J.  Ashley, 
The  Tariff  Problem  (1903);  W.  Cunningham,  The  Rise  and  Decline 
of  the  Free  Trade  Movement  (i^nd  ed.,  1905).  These  represent  various 
points  of  view.  While  the  theoretical  economists  like  Marshall  at  Cam- 
bridge, and  Edgeworth  at  Oxford,  adhere  to  the  belief  in  free  trade,  the 
economic  historians,  Cunningham  and  Ashley,  have  adopted  the  Chamber- 
lain programme  on  the  ground  that  the  rise  of  industrial  rivals  and  the 
dechne  of  her  own  resources  have  created  a  critical  situation  for  Eng- 
land, and  that  one  way  of  recovering  or  maintaining  her  leadership  is  a 
closer  union  of  the  empire,  which,  it  is  held,  a  system  of  protection 
would  facilitate.  An  interesting  general  view  by  an  outside  observer  is 
to  be  found  in  Carl  Johannes  Fuciis,  The  Trade  Policy  of  Great 
Britain  and  Her  Colonies  Since  1860,  a  German  book  trans- 
lated by  C.  H.  M.  Archibald  (1905).  On  education:  see.  Sib 
Henry  Craik,  The  State  in  its  Relation  to  Education  (2nd  edit.,  1896): 
Graham  Balfour,  The  Educational  Systems  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land  (2nd  edit.,  1903),  a  comprehensive  account  of  general  education  in 
the  United  Kingdom  during  the  nineteenth  century,  based  on  depart- 
mental reports  and  the  blue  books  of  the  numerous  commissions  which 
have  investigated  the  subject;  full  of  precise  information.  A  very 
useful  comparison  of  the  systems  of  England,  the  United  States,  France, 
and  Germany,  is  to  be  found  in  R.  E.  Hughes,  The  Making  of  Citizens: 
A  Study  in  Comparative  Education  (1902).  On  government:  see,  A.  L. 
Lowell,  The  Government  of  England,  2  vols.   (1908),  by  far  the  most 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  759 

authoritative,  comprehensive,  and  illuminating  treatise  on  the  subject;  a 
study,  moreover,  broadly  conceived;  indispensable  not  only  for  its 
profound  and  clear  analysis  and  description  of  British  government,  im- 
perial, national,  and  local,  but  for  the  light  it  throws  upon  party 
machinery  and  present  party  programmes  or  tendencies.  Other  useful 
books  on  English  government  are  the  various  volumes  of  the  English 
Citizen  Series,  edited  by  Henry  Craik;  also,  A.  V.  Dicey,  The  Law  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  Kint/dom  (1885);  Sidney  Low,  The 
Governance  of  England  (1904).  An  excellent  brief  description  is  T.  F. 
MoRAN,  The  Theory  and  Practice  of  the  English  Government  (1903), 
Bageiiot,  English  Constitution,  and  Boutmy,  The  English  Constitution, 
are  also  useful.  Of  the  first  importance  is  Anson,  Law  and  Custom  of 
the  Constitution,  3  vols.  (1892).  See,  also,  Alpheus  Todd,  Parliamentary 
Government  in  England,  2  vols.  (2nd  edit.,  1887-1889).  A  useful 
abridgment  and  revision  of  this  work  was  made  by  Sir  Spencer  Walpole 
and  published  in  1892.  Sir  Courtney  Ilbert,  Legislative  Methods  and 
Forms  (Oxford,  1901),  is  an  authority.  The  fullest  historical  account  of 
parliamentary  jirocedure  is  Redlich,  J.,  The  Procedure  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  a  Study  of  its  History  and  Present  Form,,  3  vols. 
(1908). 


CHAPTER  XXII 

The  British  Empire  in  the  Nineteenth  Centxhiy 

On  the  general  subject  of  European  colonial  expansion,  the  most  ex- 
tensive work  is  Alfred  Zimmermann's  Die  europdischen  Kolonien  (1895- 
1903).  Five  volumes  have  appeared.  The  first  volume  treats  of  the 
colonial  policy  of  Spain  and  Portugal  to  the  present,  the  second  that 
of  Great  Britain  to  the  American  Revolution,  the  third  that  of  Great 
Britain  since  the  American  Revolution,  the  fourth  that  of  France  to 
the  present,  the  fifth  that  of  the  Netherlands.  The  volumes  are  well 
supplied  with  bibliographies  and  maps.  Charles  de  Lannoy  and 
Hermann  van  der  Linden  have  undertaken  a  work  called  Histoire  de 
I'expansion  coloniale  des  peuples  europeens,  intended  to  show  how  each 
nation  has  acquired  its  colonies,  how  it  has  developed  them,  what  the 
characteristics  of  each  are.  One  volume  was  published  in  1907  (Brus- 
sels), with  bibliography  and  maps.  It  gives  an  account  of  Portuguese 
and  Spanish  colonies  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.  A  use- 
ful book  is  Paul  Leroy-Beaulieu's  La  colonisation  chez  les  peuples 
modernes,  2  vols.  (6th  edit.,  1908). 

On  English  colonial  expansion  in  general:  Zimmermann,  cited  above; 
H.  E.  Egerton,  a  Short  History  of  British  Colonial  Policy  (1897) ; 
covers  the  period  from  Cabot,  1497,  down,  treating  British  colonization 
as  a  continuous  movement;  the  latter  part  concerns  the  nineteenth 
century;  a  careful,  thoughtful  book.  By  the  same  author.  The  Origin 
and  Growth  of  the  English  Colonies  and  of  their  System  of  Government 
(Oxford,  1904),  being  an  introduction  to  Lucas's  Historical  Geography 
of  the  British  Colonies.  Contains  very  interesting  chapters  on  the  labor 
problem  in  new  colonies,  on  the  introduction  of  responsible  government, 
on  the  problem  of  the  future  relations  between  the  colonies  and  the 
mother  country;  also,  a  chronological  outline  of  the  various  acquisitions 
made  by  Great  Britain  during  the  seventeenth,  eighteenth,  and  nine- 
teenth centuries.  Sir  Charles  Dilke,  Problems  of  Greater  Britain 
(1890),  has  had  a  great  influence  in  educating  English  opinion  to  the 
importance  of  the  Empire  and  is  full  of  information;  by  the  same 
author.   The  British  Empire    (1899),   a  sort   of  birds-eye  view.     C.  P. 


760  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Lucas's  Historical  Geographii  of  the  British  Empire,  6  vols.,  new  edit., 
1906  ,  in  course  of  publication,  is  of  the  first  importance,  com- 
prehensive, accurate,  containing  nuich  historical  matter.  W.  H.  Wood- 
ward's Short  Histori/  of  the  Expansion  of  the  British  Empire,  1500- 
1870  (Cambridge,  1899),  is  a  useful  epitome.  E.  J.  Payne,  Colonies 
and  Colonial  Federations  (1904),  studies  the  Empire  from  geographical, 
historical,  economic,  and  2)olitical  points  of  view.  See,  also,  Greswell, 
W.  P.,  The  Growth  and  Administration  of  British  Colonies,  1S37-1S97 
(1898).  J.  R.  Seeley,  Expansion  of  Enc/land,  is  useful  for  an  under- 
standing of  the  general  subject.  The  British  Empire  Series,  5  vols. 
(1899-190^?),  contains  a  large  amount  of  information,  historical,  political, 
economic,  conditions  for  colonization,  outlook  for  the  future,  etc.;  vol.  I 
concerns  India;  vol.  II,  British  Africa;  vol.  Ill,  British  America;  vol.  IV, 
Australia.  Bryce's  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence  contain  very  im- 
portant studies  on  The  Roman  Empire  and  the  British  Empire  in  India, 
on  Two  South  African  Constitutions,  and  on  the  Constitution  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Australia.  Consult,  also,  on  the  Empire:  Lowell, 
The  Government  of  England,  vol.  II,  chaps.  LIV-LVIII;  Cambridge 
Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  Chaps.  XXVI  and  XXVII,  with  bibliographies; 
also,  for  colonial  develojjment  from  1815-1853,  mainly  in  South  Africa 
and  Australia:  Walpole's  History  of  England  Since  1815,  vol.  VI,  pp. 
325-379;  also  A.  T.  Story,  The  British  Empire  (Story  of  the  Nations 
Series).  Alpheus  Todd,  Parliamentary  Government  in  the  British 
Colonies  (2nd  edit.,  1894),  is  an  authoritative  treatment  of  the  opera- 
tion of  responsible  government  in  the  colonies. 

On  India:  see,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  chap.  XXVI 
(from  1815  to  1869);  R.  W.  Eraser,  British  Rule  in  India  (Story  of 
the  Nations  Series);  Boulger,  India  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1901); 
DiGBY,  Prosperous  British  India  (1901),  a  severe  arraignment  of  British 
government  in  India;  M,  Innes,  The  Sepoy  Revolt  (1897);  Sir  John 
Kai-e,  The  Sepoy  War,  3  vols.  (1864-1876),  completed  by  G.  B. 
Malleson  (1878-1880) ;  G.  W.  Forrest,  A  History  of  the  Indian 
Mutiny,  Reviexoed  and  Illustrated  from  Original  Documents,  2  vols. 
(1904);  G.  B.  Malleson,  The  Indian  Mutiny  of  1851  (1891);  Lilly, 
India  and  Its  Problems.  A.  L.  Lowell  has  a  valuable  chapter  on  the 
Civil  Service  of  India  in  his  Colonial  Civil  Service  (1900).  Sir  Court- 
ney Ilbert,  The  Government  of  India  (1898),  is  pronounced  by  Lowell 
to  be  "  by  far  the  best  work  on  the  public  law  of  India." 

On  Canada:  Bibliography  may  be  found  in  the  A.  L.  A.  Annotated 
Guide  to  the  Literature  of  American  History,  edited  by  J.  N.  Earned 
(1902);  bibliographies  also  in  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  and 
in  Low  and  Sanders,  History  of  England,  1837-1901.  Good  brief 
histories  are:  Sir  John  Bourinot,  Canada  Under  British  Rule,  1760- 
1900;  C.  G.  D.  Roberts,  History  of  Canada  (1904).  Kings  ford's 
elaborate  history  in  ten  volumes  only  reaches  1841.  On  Lord  Durham's 
mission:  see,  F.  Bradshaw,  Self -Government  in  Canada  and  How  it 
was  Achieved,  the  Story  of  Lord  Durham's  Report  (London,  1903); 
eight  chapters  are  devoted  to  a  careful  account  of  the  history  of 
Canada  to  the  outbreak  of  the  Rebellion,  and  show  the  growth  of  the 
demand  for  responsible  government;  see,  also,  S.  J.  Reid,  Life  and 
Letters  of  Lord  Durham,  2  vols.  (1906),  a  very  laudatory  book  but 
full  of  information  concerning  Lord  Durham's  work  in  Canada.  Lord 
Durham's  Report  was  republished  in  London  in  1901.  Perhaps  the 
best  manual  dealing  with  the  constitutional  history  of  Canada  is  Sir 
John  Bourinot's  A  Manual  of  the  Constitutional  History  of  Canada 
(1901).  Canadian  Constitutional  Development,  by  H.  E.  Egerton  and 
W.  L.  Grant  (1907),  contains  speeches  and  despatches  pertinent  to  the 
subject,    with    introduction    and    notes;    see,    also,    William    Houston, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  761 

Documents  Illustrative  of  the  Canadian  Constitution  (1891).  Canada 
and  the  Empire,  by  E.  Montague  and  B.  Herbert  (1904),  is  written 
from  an  imperialist  standpoint.  Holland,  B.,  Imperium  et  Libertas.  A 
Sttidy  in  History  and  Politics  (1901);  pp.  95-190  treat  Canadian  history 
from  17G3  to  1H()7. 

On  Australasia:  sec,  the  excellent  History  of  the  Australasian  Colonies 
by  E.  Jenks  (1895),  which  comes  down  to  1893;  also,  G.  Tregarthen, 
Australian  Commonwealth  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series);  comes  down 
to  1891 ;  also  an  admirable  volume  by  J.  D.  Rogers  in  Lucas's  Historical 
Oeoyraphy  of  the  British  Colonies,  vol.  VI  (1907).  The  most  valuable 
work  for  the  recent  constitutional  development  is  The  Annotated  Consti- 
tution of  the  Australian  Commonwealth  by  Sir  J.  Quick,  and  R.  R. 
Garran  (Sydney,  1901).  This  contains  a  full  history  of  the  movement 
toward  federation  and  of  each  clause  of  the  constitution.  W.  H.  Moore, 
The  Constitution  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Australia  (1903),  is  an  im- 
portant commentary.  Bryce  has  a  useful  account  of  the  making  and 
character  of  the  constitution  in  his  Studies  in  History  and  Jurisprudence. 
On  social  and  economic  conditions  and  measures  and  experiments:  see. 
Reeves,  The  Long  White  Cloud  (1899),  and  State  Experiments  in  Aus- 
tralia and  New  Zealand,  3  vols.  (1903);  H.  D.  Lloyd,  Neivest  England 
(New  Zealand  and  Austi-alia)  (1900);  V.  Clark,  The  Labor  Movement 
in  Australia.  The  most  recent  book  is  by  B.  R.  Wise,  entitled  The  Com- 
monwealth of  Australia  (Boston,  1909),  a  description  of  the  country,  of 
political  institutions,  of  industrial  legislation,  etc.  On  New  Zealand: 
see,  also,  Siri  Arthur  P.  Douglas,  The  Dominion  of  New  Zealand  (1909). 

For  South  Africa:  see,  G.  M.  Theal,  South  Africa  (Story  of  the 
Nations  Series,  1894);  pp.  138-387  cover  the  years  1815-1890;  Frank 
R.  Cana,  South  Africa  from  the  Great  Trek  to  the  Union  (1909).  An 
excellent  account  of  the  history  of  Europeans  in  South  Africa  down  to 
1895  is  contained  in  Bryce's  Imjyressions  of  South  Africa  (1897),  pp. 
99-183.  A  clear  account  of  the  causes  and  early  course  of  the  Boer 
war  is  given  in  Bright's  History  of  England,  vol.  V,  pp.  234-366.  Many 
of  the  important  state  papers,  mostly  English,  bearing  on  this  war,  are 
in  Larned,  History  for  Beady  Reference,  vol.  VI,  pp.  456-517.  For 
the  Boer  side  of  the  case:  see,  the  Memoirs  of  Paul  Kruger.  Sir  A.  Conan 
Doyle,  The  Great  Boer  War  (1902),  is  a  useful  narrative,  from  the 
British  standpoint.  The  Times  History  of  the  War  in  South  Africa, 
edited  by  L.  C.  Amery-,  vols.  I-IV  (1900-1906),  is  very  detailed.  On  the 
literature  of  the  South  African  War:  see,  American  Historical  Bevieiv, 
vol.  XII,  pp.  399-331.  On  the  recent  federation  movement:  see,  R.  H. 
Brand,  The  Union  of  South  Africa  (1909),  which  contains  the  South 
Africa  Act  of  20th  September,  1909,  an  account  of  its  elaboration  and 
adoption  and  a  study  of  its  provisions. 

On  the  reaction  of  imperialism  upon  the  mother  country:  see,  Richard 
Jebb,  Sttidies  in  Colonial  Nationalism  (1905);  contains  chapters  on 
Canada,  From  Colonies  to  Commonwealth  (Australia),  New  Zealand, 
South  African  War,  the  Colonial  Conference  of  1903,  Nationalism  in 
Tariffs,  and  Imperial  Partnership.  See,  also,  J.  W.  Root,  Colonial 
Tariffs  (Liverjiool,  1906);  Carl  Johannes  Fuciis,  The  Trade  Policy  of 
Great  Britain  and  her  Colonies  Since  ISGO  (1905).  See,  also,  Bernard 
Holland,  Imperium  et  Libertas  (1901),  pp.  265-319.  An  important 
work  concerning  the  colonies,  recently  published,  is  The  Legislation  of 
the  Empire:  Being  a  Survey  of  the  Legislative  Enactments  of  the  British 
Dominions  from  1S98  to  1009.  Edited  by  C.  E.  A.  Bedwell,  with  a 
preface  by  Lord  Rosebery,  4  vols.  (1909).  Contains  about  25,000  acts 
and  ordinances. 


762  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

CHAPTER  XXIII 

Africa 

For  explorations  in  Africa:  see,  David  Livingstone,  by  Thomas  Hughes 
(1889);  (by  Livingstone  himself),  Missionary  Travels  and  Researches 
in  South  Africa  (1857),  and  Last  Journals  in  Central  Africa,  from 
1865  to  death,  edited  by  Waller  (1875);  H.  M,  Stanley,  How  I  Found 
Livingstone;  Travels,  Adventures,  and  Discoveries  in  Central  Africa 
{l%12);  Through  the  Dark  Continent  or  the  Sources  of  the  Nile,  2  vols. 
(1878);  The  Congo  and  the  Founding  of  Its  Free  State,  2  vols.  (1885); 
In  Darkest  Africa,  2  vols.  (1890);  The  Autobiography  of  Henry  M. 
Stanley,  edited  by  his  wife,  Dorothy  Stanley  (1909),  chaps.  XIII,  XV- 
XVIII;  V.  L.  Cameron,  Across  Africa  (1876);  Carl  Peters,  Neio  Light 
on  Dark  Africa  (1891).  A  very  useful  collection  of  contemporary 
accounts  is,  Africa  and  Its  Exploration,  as  Told  by  Its  Ex- 
plorers, 2  vols.  (London,  Sampson  Low,  Marston  &  Co.,  no  date).  See, 
also,  Robert  Brown,  Story  of  Africa,  4  vols.  (1894-1895). 

On  the  partition  of  Africa,  the  most  important  book  is  J.  Scott 
Keltie,  The  Partition  of  Africa  (1895);  see,  also,  ^^mile  Banning, 
Le  partage  politique  de  I'Afrique  d'apres  les  transactions  Internationales 
les  plus  rScentes,  1885-18S8  (1888);  A.  S.  White,  The  Development  of 
Africa.  A  Study  in  Applied  Geography  (2nd  edit.,  1892);  for  a  short 
account.  Rose,  J.  H.,  The  Development  of  European  Nations,  vol.  II, 
chap.  VII.  Sir  Harry  Johnston,  History  of  the  Colonization  of  Africa 
by  Alien  Races  (1899),  is  a  very  useful  manual,  compressing  a  large 
amount  of  information  into  a  small  compass;  written  by  a  man  who  is 
an  authority  on  African  affairs,  having  traveled  extensively  in  that  con- 
tinent, and  ha\ing  been  consul  and  administrator  there;  describes  the 
eflforts  of  the  Portuguese,  Dutch,  English,  and  the  other  nations;  has 
brief  chapters  on  the  history  of  the  slave  trade,  of  exploration,  of  mis- 
sions, etc. 

On  England  in  Egypt:  Rose,  Development  of  European  Nations,  vol. 
II,  chaps.  IV-VI;  Cromer,  Modern  Egypt,  2  vols.  (1908),  practically  a 
history  of  Egypt  from  1876  to  1908,'  of  the  Dual  Control  whicli  was 
succeeded  by  the  Single  Control  of  England,  by  the  man  who  was  the 
British  representative  in  Egypt  for  twenty-seven  years.  An  invaluable 
book,  marked  by  a  wealth  of  precise  information,  by  positiveness,  by 
judicial  temper,  and  by  an  extraordinary  detachment  of  view.  Is,  to  a 
considerable  degree,  an  historical  source  as  well  as  a  history.  For  an 
important  review  of  this  book  by  Mr.  Bryce,  see,  American  Historical 
Review,  vol.  XIV,  pp.  357-362.  On  the  British  intervention  and  the 
Gordon  chapter  one  should  consult  in  addition  to  Cromer:  Morley's  Glad- 
stone, vol.  Ill,  and  Fitzmaurice's  Granville,  vol.  II.  Other  important 
books  on  Egypt  are:  Sir  Alfred  Milner's  England  in  Egi/pt  (11th  edit., 
1904) ;  Sir  A.  Colvin's  The  Making  of  Modern  Egypt  (2nd  edit.,  1906)  ; 
A.  Metin's  La  Transformation  de  I'^gypte  (1903)  ;  J.  C.  Roux,  L'Isthme 
et  le  Canal  de  Suez,  2  vols.  (1901).  Popular  accounts  are  E.  Dicey, 
Story  of  the  Khedivate  (1902),  and  The  Egypt  of  the  Future  (1906). 
The  Story  of  Kitchener's  campaign  is  graphically  told  by  G.  W. 
Steevens,  With  Kitchener  to  Khartum  (1898).  On  the  Congo  Free 
State,  there  is  a  short  account  in  Rose,  Development  of  European 
Nations,  vol.  II,  chap.  VIII. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  763 

CHAPTER  XXIV 

Spain  and  Portugal  Since  1823 

There  is  no  satisfactory  history  of  Spain  in  the  nineteenth  century  in 
English.  Butler  Clarke's  Modern  Spain,  1815-1898,  is  the  fullest,  but 
is  overloaded  with  details,  not  effectively  presented.  Pages  91-470  cover 
the  period  of  this  chapter.  A  bibliography  is  appended.  HuaiE,  Modern 
Spain,  1788-1898  (1899),  is  a  shorter  and  more  interesting  account; 
pages  348-563  treat  the  period  1833-1898.  There  are  brief  chapters  in 
Cambridije  Modern  History,  vol.  X,  chap.  VII,  and  vol.  XI,  chap.  XX, 
bringing  the  history  down  to   1871. 

Hubbard,  Hisioire  contemporaine  de  I'Espagne,  6  vols.  (1869-1883), 
is  useful,  treating  the  period  1814  to  1868.  Vols.  Ill  and  IV  cover  the 
years  1833  to  1843,  and  vols.  V  and  VI  the  reign  of  Isabella  II,  1843- 
1868.  Yves  Guyot,  L'Evohition  politique  et  sociale  de  l'Espa(jne  (1899), 
is  mainly  a  description  of  social,  political,  and  economic  conditions,  not 
a  history. 

In  German,  see,  Baubigarten,  H.,  Geschichte  Spaniens  vom  Aus- 
briich  der  franzoKischen  Revolution  bis  auf  unsere  Tage,  3  vols., 
(1865-1871).  Vol.  II  treats  of  the  restoration  of  Ferdinand,  the  revolu- 
tion of  1820,  and  the  subsequent  intervention  (1814-1825) ;  vol.  Ill,  the  re- 
mainder of  Ferdinand's  reign  and  the  Carlist  wars.  A  more  recent  Ger- 
man work  is  GusTAV  Diehcks,  Oeschichte  Spaniens  von  der  friihesten 
Zeiten  bis  auf  die  Gegenwart,  2  vols.  (1895-1896);  pp.  544-674  concern 
our  period.  E.  H.  Stuobel,  The  Spanish  Revolution,  1868-1875  (Boston, 
1898),  is  a  clear  and  comiirehensive  account  of  the  parliamentary  history 
of  Spain  during  the  six  years  from  the  overthrow  of  Isabella  II  to  the 
restoration  of  Alfonso  XII.  The  book  also  throws  much  light  on  the 
manipulation  of  parliamentary  institutions  in  Spain.  H.  Remsen  White- 
house,  The  Sacrifice  of  a  Throne  (1897),  is  the  best  description  we  have 
of  the  election,  reign,  and  abdication  of  Amadeo  of  Savoy.  Hannay,  D., 
Don  EmiUo  Castelar  (1896),  a  life  of  the  republican  leader.  On  the 
colonies:  see,  J.  W.  Root,  Spain  and  Its  Colonies  (1898);  Zimmermann, 
A.,  Die  europdischen  Kolonien,  vol.  I,  Die  Kolonialpolitik  Portugals  und 
Spaniens  (1899);  H.  W.  Wilson,  The  Downfall  of  Spain  (1900),  is  a 
naval  history  of  the  Spanish-American  war  of  1898. 

On  constitutional  history:  see,  Gmelin,  Sttidien  zur  spanischen  Ver- 
fassungsgeschichte  des  neunzehnten  Jahrhunderts  (Stuttgart,  1905); 
also,  J.  L.  M.  Curry,  Constitutional  Government  in  Spain  (1899).  Curry 
was  United  States  Minister  to  Spain  from  1885  to  1889.  The  constitu- 
tion itself  is  in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions,  vol.  II.  On  Portugal  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  there  is  a  slight  sketch  of  the  years  1815  to  1880 
in  H.  Morse  Stephens,  Portugal  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series,  1891), 
pp.  409-432;  see,  also,  chapters  in  Cambridge  Modern  History  cited  above. 
On  the  colonies:  see,  Zimmermann,  op.  cit.;  G.  M.  Theal,  The  Portuguese 
in  South  Africa  (1896). 

CHAPTER  XXV 

Holland  and  Belgium  Since  1830 

For  Holland  and  Belgium:  consult,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol. 
X,  chap.  XVI,  and  vol.  XI,  chap.  XXIII;  Lavisse  et  Rambaud,  Histoire 
generate,  vol.  X,  chap.  IX,  vol.  XT,  chap.  XI,  vol.  XII,  chap.  VI;  also, 
Seignobos,  Political  History  of  Europe  Since  181i,  chap.  VIII.  The 
best  history  of  Holland  in  the  last  century  is  in  Dutch  and  has  not  yet 
been  translated:  Blok,  Geschiedenis  van  het  Nederlandsche   Volk;  vol. 


764  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

VII  (1907)  covers  the  French  period  and  the  history  of  the  United 
Netherlands  to  the  secession  of  Belgium;  vol.  VIII  (1908)  continues  the 
narrative  down  to  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century;  an  impartial, 
critical,  scientific  work,  containing  much  more  than  simply  political 
history.  Clixt;  Day,  The  Policy  and  Administration  of  the  Dutch  in 
Jai'a  (1904),  is  a  book  of  the  first  importance.  On  Belgium:  see, 
Smytiie,  C,  The  Stori/  of  Beh/ium  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series,  1900); 
T.  JrsTE,  Leopold  I,  Roi  des  BeUjes,  d'apres  les  documents  inedits,  2  vols. 
(1868);  Bertrand,  L.,  Leopold  II  et  son  regno  lf>65-1800  (Brussels, 
1890) ;  WiLiMOTTE,  M.,  La  Belgique  morale  et  politique,  1830-1890 
(Brussels,  1902)  ;  MacDonnell,  J.  de  C,  King  Leopold  II,  His  Rule  in 
Belgium  and  the  Congo  (London,  1905)  ;  Bertrand,  L.,  Histoire  de  la 
democratic  et  du  socialisme  en  Belgique  depuis  ISSO,  2  vols.  (Brussels, 
1907);  comes  down  to  1905;  Flakdin,  E.,  Institutions  poliliques  de 
VEurope  contemporaine  (Paris,  1907),  vol.  I,  pp.  lGO-307;  Banning,  E., 
La  Belgique  au  point  de  vue  militaire  et  Internationale  (Brussels,  1901); 
DupRiEZ,  Leon,  L' organisation  du  suffrage  universel  en  Belgique.  Vote 
plural,  vote  obligatoire,  representation  proportionelle  (Paris,  1901). 
Constitution  of  Belgium  in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions,  vol.  I. 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

Switzerland 

There  are  in  English  only  brief  accounts  of  Swiss  history  since  1815. 
See,  Cambridge  Modern  Ilistory,  vol.  XI,  chap.  VIII,  down  to  1874; 
Seignobos,  Political  History  of  Europe  Since  181),  chap.  IX;  Hug  and 
Stead,  Switzerland  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series,  1890),  pp.  382-421; 
comes  down  to  1889.  McCracken,  W.  D.,  The  Rise  of  the  Sioiss 
Republic  (2nd  edit.,  1901),  pp.  319-372;  see,  also.  Baker,  F.  G.,  The 
Model  Republic.  A  History  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the  Swiss 
People  (1895),  pp.  462-538.  The  most  important  work  is  Seippel,  Paul, 
La  Suisse  au  di.e-neuvi^me  siecle,  3  vols.  (Lausanne,  1899-1900).  A  co- 
operative work  by  a  group  of  Swiss  writers.  The  section  on  the  political 
history  of  Switzerland  in  the  nineteenth  century,  vol.  I,  pp.  51-378,  is 
by  NujiA  Droz,  a  former  President  of  the  Confederation.  The  work  also 
contains  very  valuable  chapters  on  the  history  of  institutions,  on 
constitutional,  civil,  and  criminal  law,,  on  the  international  role  of 
Switzerland,  on  education,  religion,  economic  history,  arts,  etc.  Karl 
Dandliker,  a  Short  Ilistory  of  Sivitzerland.  translated  by  E. 
Salisbury  (London,  1899),  has  a  section  covering  the  period  1813-1874, 
pp.  237-294.  On  Swiss  political  institutions,  the  best  book  in  English  is 
J.  M.  Vincent,  Government  in  Switzerland  (1900);  contains  the  federal 
constitution  and  an  excellent  critical  chapter  on  the  literature  of  the 
subject.  Borgeaud,  C,  Adoption  and  Amendment  of  Constitiitions, 
translated  by  C.  D.  Hazen  (1895),  pp.  258-332,  is  important  for  the 
evolution  of  Swiss  constitutional  law.  Lowell,  A.  L.,  Governments  and 
Parties  in  Continental  Europe,  vol.  II,  chaps.  XI-XIII,  contains  an 
admirable  description  of  the  political  institutions  of  Switzerland  and  of 
the  party  history  after  1848.  Other  books  descriptive  of  Swiss  institu- 
tions are:  Adams,  F.  O.,  and  Cunningham,  C.  D.,  The  Swiss  Confedera- 
tion (1889)  ;  Winchester,  B.,  The  Swiss  Republic  (1891);  Lloyd,  H.  D., 
and  Hobson,  J.  A.,  A  Sovereign  People;  a  Study  of  Siviss' Democracy 
(1907).  An  interesting  study  of  democratic  government  in  one  of  the 
Landesgemeinde  cantons  is  I.  B.  Richman's  Appenzell,  Pure  Democracy 
and  Pastoral  Life  in  Inner  Rhoden  (1895).  Contains  chapters  on 
politics,  laws,  administration,  cantonal  and  domestic  economy,  education, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  765 

charities,  etc.  Useful  for  tlie  study  of  the  referendum,  is  Deploige,  Tlie 
Referendum  in  Switzerland,  translated  by  C.  P.  Trevelyan  (London, 
1898) ;  by  a  Belgian  lawyer.  W.  H.  Dawson,  Social  Switzerland,  Studies 
of  Present  Day  Social  Movements  and  Legislation  in  the  Swiss  Republic 
(London,  1897);  contains  chapters  on  tlie  organization  and  protection 
of  labor,  on  industrial  peace,  the  problem  of  tlie  unemployed,  poor  law 
agencies,  technical  education,  control  of  the  liquor  traffic. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

The  Scandinavian  States 

There  is  very  little  in  English  on  the  subject  of  this  chapter.  Useful 
brief  accounts  are  to  be  found  in  Bain,  R.  N.,  Scandinavia,  A  Political 
History  of  Denmark,  Norway,  and  Stoeden,  from  1513  to  1000  (Cam- 
bridge, 1905);  chap.  XV^I  concerns  Denmark  since  1814;  chap.  XVII, 
Sweden  and  Norway  since  1814;  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI, 
chap.  XXIV,  Scandinavia  1815-1870;  Seignobos,  Political  History  of 
Europe,  chap.  XVIII;  LaviSse  et  Rambaud,  Histoire  generate,  vol.  X, 
chap.  XVIII;  vol.  XI,  chap.  XII;  vol.  XII,  chap.  VII,  give  an  excellent, 
though  brief  narrative,  covering  the  period  1815-1900.  H.  H.  Boyesen,  The 
History  of  Noricay  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series,  1886),  pp.  516-538.  On 
the  Norwegian-Swedish  crisis:  see,  Fridtjof  Nansen's  Norway  and  the 
Union  with  Sweden  (London,  1905);  an  historical  sketch  from  the 
Treaty  of  Kiel,  1814,  through  the  dissolution  of  the  Union;  presents  the 
Norwegian  side.  K.  Nohdlund,  The  Swedish-Norwegian  Union  Crisis, 
A  History  with  Documents  (Stockholm,  1905),  presents  the  Swedish  side 
and  criticises  Nansen.  Consult,  also,  Mohn,  A.,  La  Suede  et  la  revolu- 
tion norv6gienne  (Paris,  1905);  Faiii.beck,  P.,  La  constitution  suedoise 
et  le  parlementarisme  moderne  (Paris,  1905),  a  brief  sketch  of  Swedish 
constitutional  history  and  government.  The  constitutions  of  Denmark, 
Norway,  and  Sweden,  are  in  Dodd,  Modern  Constitutions.  Much  useful, 
miscellaneous  information  is  contained  in  Sundbarg,  Sioeden,  Its  People 
and  Industries  (1900);  Weitemeyer,  H.,  Denmark  (London,  1891);  and 
Carlsen,  Olrik,  and  Starcke,  Le  Danemark,  Etat  actuel  de  sa  civilisa- 
tion et  de  son  organisation  sociale  (Copenhagen,  1900) ;  a  work  published 
on  the  occasion  of  the  Universal  Exposition  at  Paris  in  1900. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

The    Disruption    of    the    Ottoman    Empire    and    the    Rise    of    the 
Balkan  States 

There  is  no  adequate  treatment  in  English^  of  the  Eastern  Question 
in  its  entirety.  An  admirable  French  liook  is  Edodard  Driault,  La  ques- 
tion d'Orient  depuis  scs  origines  jusqu'd  nos  jours  (3nd  edit.,  Paris, 
1900),  a  book  that  may  be  cordially  recommended  to  any  one  desiring  a 
guide  to  a  very  complicated  and  widelj^  ramified  branch  of  history.  The 
author's  conception  of  the  Eastern  Question  is  large,  including  not 
only  the  fate  of  the  Ottoman  Empire  in  Europe,  but  the  decline  of 
Islam  in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa.  After  a  brief  sketch  of  the 
Byzantine  and  Latin  Empires,  the  conquests  of  the  Turks,  Driault 
traces  the  history  of  the  Eastern  Question  in  the  eighteenth  century. 
Napoleon's  Oriental  projects,  the  Greek  war  of  independence,  the 
internal  reforms  in  Turkey,  the  Crimean  war  and  its  consequences,  the 
war  in  the  Balkans,  the  rise  of  the  various  states.    Recent  phases  of  the 


766  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

general  problem  are  then  treated:  the  Armenian  Massacres,  the  Cretan 
problem,  the  Greco-Turkish  war,  the  Macedonian  question,  and  the 
relations  of  Occidental  powers  with  Islam  in  Asia  and  Africa.  The 
chief  merit  of  the  work  lies,  not  in  research,  but  in  the  orderly  and 
effective  arrangement  and  presentation  of  a  mass  of  widely  scattered 
information.  The  book  contains  useful  bibliographical  references  to 
important  secondary  material. 

There  is  a  useful  though  limited  bibliography  on  the  Eastern  Ques- 
tion by  Georges  Bekgesco,  Essai  d'une  notice  bibliograpMque  sur  la 
question  d'Orient.  Orient  Europeen,  1821-1^97  (Brussels,  1897).  This 
concerns  only  the  question  of  Europe  in  Turkey  and  is  limited  to  works 
published  in  France  and  Belgium.  Bengesco  was  formerly  Roumanian 
minister  to  Belgium.  T.  E.  Holland,  The  European  Concert  in  the 
Eastern  Question,  contains  many  treaties,  etc.,  bearing  on  the  general 
question  (1883). 

On  the  Greek  war  of  independence,  there  is  a  long  and  interesting 
chapter,  sketching  the  Greek  renaissance  and  describing  vividly  the 
military  and  diplomatic  aspects  of  the  stirring  story  in  Fyffe,  History 
of  Modern  Europe,  vol.  II,  chap.  IV  (or  chap.  XV,  in  the  one  volume 
edition).  W.  Allison  Phillips,  The  War  of  Greek  Independence 
(1897),  treats  the  years  1821  to  1833.  Having  no  adequate  introduction, 
the  book  lacks  background,  but  the  narrative  of  events  is  full,  fair, 
and  interesting.  It  is  not  based  upon  original  investigation  but  upon 
works  of  Mendelssohn-Bartholdy,  Finlay,  Gordon,  and  Prokesch-Osten. 
FiNLAY,  G.,  History  of  the  Greek  Revolution,  is  an  important  account, 
drawn  largely  upon  the  author's  first  hand  knowledge  of  events.  Tozer's 
edition,  1877,  is  the  best  as  representing  Finlay's  matured  views.  The 
Letters  and  Journals  of  Samuel  Gridley  Howe,  edited  by  his  daughter, 
Lauba  E.  Richards,  are  very  valuable;  vol.  I,  entitled  The  Greek 
Revolution  (Boston,  1906),  throws  a  flood  of  light  upon  the  course  of 
the  war.  The  volume  is  based  almost  entirely  upon  the  journal  of  Howe, 
who,  graduating  from  Brown  University  in  1821,  and  from  Harvard 
Medical  School  in  1824,  went  immediately  to  Greece,  joined  the  Greek 
army,  created  a  surgical  corps  and  also  distinguished  himself  as  a 
commander.  His  journal,  though  marked  by  serious  gaps,  is  a  \ivid 
historical  source  for  the  years  1825  to  1829.  Howe's  volume  called, 
Sketch  of  the  Greek  Revolution,  published  in  1828,  also  abounds  in 
graphic  descriptions  at  first  hand  of  men  and  events.  Interesting  side- 
lights on  the  Greek  war  are  also  to  be  found  in  the  works  of  Lord 
Byron,  Letters  and  Journals,  vol.  VI,  edited  by  Rowland  E.  Prothero 
(London,  1904). 

Perhaps  the  most  important  recent  account  of  this  whole  chapter  of 
Greek  history  is  in  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas,  vol.  II,  chaps.  VII  and 
XIV;  vol.  Ill,  chaps.  IV-VI;  vol.  IV,  chap.  X. 

On  the  Crimean  War:  see,  Walpole,  History  of  England  Since  1815, 
vol.  VI,  chap.  XXIV;  McCarthy,  History  of  Our  Own  Times,  vol.  I, 
chaps.  XXV-XXVIII;  Paul,  History  of  Modern  England,  vol.  I,  chaps. 
XVII-XIX,  and  vol.  II,  chap.  I.  Paul's  characterization  of  Napoleon  III 
is  so  overdone  as  to  approach  the  ridiculous.  Kinglake's  monumental 
Invasion  of  the  Crimea  (8  vols.,  1863-1887)  is  a  brilliant  performance  in 
a  way,  picturesque  and  full  of  detail,  but  is  frequently  amusingly 
portentous  and  Homeric  in  tone;  is  marked  by  a  pronounced  dislike  of 
Napoleon  III;  and  is,  moreover,  incomplete,  stopping  at  the  death  of 
Lord  Raglan.  Probably  the  most  informing  and  most  interesting  ac- 
count, judicial  as  well,  is  that  of  Gorge  in  his  Histoire  du  Second  Em- 
pire, vol.  I,  pp.  134-481,  a  masterly  piece  of  exposition.  An  important 
phase  of  this  war  is  well  treated  by  H.  Fried jung  in  Der  Krimkrieg  und 
die   oesterreichische  Politik   (1907),   a  clear,  scientific  analysis  of  the 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  767 

peculiarly  involved  and  difficult  foreign  relations  of  Austria  during  the 
years  1853-1856;  a  purely  diplomatic  study.  An  excellent  brief  treat- 
ment of  the  diplomacy  of  the  period  is  contained  in  Andrews,  Historical 
Development  of  Modern  Europe,  vol.  II,  chap.  II. 

On  the  re-opening  of  the  Eastern  Question,  the  war  in  the  Balkans 
and  the  Congress  of  Berlin:  Walpole,  History  of  Twenty-five  Years, 
vol.  IV,  chaps.  XVII  and  XVIII;  Paui,  History  of  Modern  England, 
vol.  IV,  chaps.  I  and  II;  McCarthy,  History  of  Our  Own  Times,  vol.  II, 
chaps.  LXIV  and  LXV;  Rose,  The  Development  of  the  European 
Nations,  vol.  I,  chaps.  VII-IX  (includes  a  clear  account  of  the  Russo- 
Turkish  campaign)  ;  Hanotaux,  Contemporary  France,  vol.  IV,  chaps. 
II  and  V;  Debidour,  Histoire  diplomatique,  vol.  II,  chap.  XIII; 
Bourgeois,  E.,  Manuel  historique  de  politique  etrang^re,  vol.  Ill,  pp.  783- 
815;  MoRLEY,  Life  of  Gladstone,  vol.  II,  pp.  548-583;  Bismarck,  Reflec- 
tions and  Reminiscences,  vol.  II,  chap.  XXVIII;  Skrine,  Expansion  of 
Russia,  pp.  243-265;  Sergeant,  L.,  Greece  in  the  Nineteenth  Century, 
pp.  270-307;  Whitman,  S.,  Reminiscences  of  the  King  of  Roumania, 
chaps.  VIII-XI. 

On  Bulgaria  since  1878:  see,  Rose,  Development  of  the  European 
Nations,  vol.  I,  chap.  X;  Miller,  W.,  The  Balkans  (Story  of  the  Nations 
Series),  pp.  215-248  (comes  down  to  1896);  A.  H.  Beaman,  Stambulof 
(1895);  E.  Dicey,  The  Peasant  State  (1894);  Odysseus  (Sir  C.  Eliot), 
Turkey  in  Europe. 

On  Roumanian  history:  see.  Whitman,  Reminiscences  of  the  King 
of  Roumania,  chap.  XI ;  Fredkric  Dame,  Histoire  de  la  Roumanie  con- 
temporaine  depuis  I'avlnement  des  princes  indigenes  jusqu'a  nos  jours. 
1822-1900  (Paris,  1900) ;  Bellesort,  A.,  La  Roumanie  contemporaine 
(Paris,  1905),  a  book  of  travel;  G.  Benger,  Roumania  in  1900,  trans- 
lated by  A.  H.  Keene  (London,  1900),  with  bibliography;  contains 
chapters  on  history,  political  organizations,  commerce,  religion,  art,  etc.; 
A.  DE  Bertha,  Magyars  et  Roumains  devant  Vhistoire  (Paris,  1899) ; 
Eliade,  p.,  Histoire  de  Vesprit  public  en  Roumanie  aii  XIX&  sidcle 
(Paris,  1905) ;  Fisher,  E.,  Die  Herkunft  der  Rumdnen  (Bamberg,  1904) ; 
Georges  Bengesco,  Bibliographie  Franco-Roumaine,  depuis  le  commence- 
ment du  XIXe  sidcle  jusqu'a,  nos  jours  (Paris,  1907),  a  list  of  works 
edited  or  published  in  France  concerning  Roumania,  French  works  pub- 
lished by  Roumanian  authors,  doctoral  theses  sustained  by  Roumanians 
down  to  1894  before  French  faculties. 

On  Servian  history:  see.  Miller,  The  Balkans,  part  III,  chap.  VII;  very 
brief.  Miller's  book  in  general  is  very  inadequate  on  period  since  1878; 
P.  Coquelle,  Le  Royaume  de  Serbie  (Paris,  1901).  Covers  the  history 
from  610  A.  D.  down;  pp.  215-298  concern  the  nineteenth  century  from 
1815  to  1900. 

On  Greece  under  Otto:  see.  Sergeant,  L.,  Greece  .in  the  Nineteenth 
Century  (1897),  pp.  218-258;  Finlay,  G.,  History  of  the  Greek  Revolu- 
tion, book  V,  chap.  IV  (down  to  1843).  On  reign  of  George  I:  see, 
Sergeant,  Greece  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  pp.  258-395.  Bickford- 
Smith,  R.  a.  H.,  Greece  Under  King  George  (1893),  is  not  a  history 
but  a  description  of  economic  conditions,  education,  army  and  navy, 
constitution,  etc.  On  Greece:  see,  also.  Sir  Richard  C.  Jebb's  Modern 
Greece.  Two  lectures  with  papers  on  The  Progress  of  Greece  and 
Byron  in  Greece  (1880),  2nd  edition  published  in  1901. 

On  Turkey  in  the  nineteenth  century:  see,  Seignobos,  Political  History 
of  Europe  Since  1814,  chap.  XX;  S.  Lane-Poole,  Turkey  (Story  of  the 
Nations  Series,  1888),  pp.  340-365;  Odysseus  (Sir  C.  Eliot),  Turkey  in 
Europe  (1900);  Villari,  editor,  The  Balkan  Question  (1905);  Brails- 
ford,  H.  N.,  Macedonia,  Its  Races  and  Their  Future  (1906);  W.  M. 
Ramsey,  Impressions  of  Turkey.     On  recent  events:  see,  Barton,  Day- 


768  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

break  in  Turkey   (Boston,  1909);  C.  R.  Buxton,  Turkey  in  Revolution 
'London,  1909);  G.  F.  Abbott,  Turkey  in  Transition  (1909). 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

Russia  to  the  War  with  Japan 

The  best  history  of  Russia  in  English  covering  our  period  is  Skrine, 
F.  H.,  Expansion  of  Russia,  1815-1900  (1903);  clear  and  free  from 
partisanship;  contains  maps  and  bibliography.  Rambaud,  History  of 
Russia  from  the  Earliest  Times  to  1877,  translated  by  L.  B.  Lang,  2  vols., 
vol.  II,  pp.  200-285,  is  useful.  Rambaud's  work  was  pronounced  by 
Turgenieff  "  superior  to  any  other  history  accessible  to  Western  Europe." 
Rabibaud,  The  Expansion  of  Russia,  Problems  of  the  East  and'Problems 
of  the  Far  East  (Burlington,  Vt.,  1900),  a  very  useful  resume  of  the 
Russian  advance  into  Asia.  Morfill,  W.  R.  A.,  History  of  Russia  from 
the  Birth  of  Peter  the  Great  to  the  Death  of  Alexander  II  (1902),  con- 
tains a  good  deal  of  information,  poorly  presented.  Pages  342-471  cover 
the  years  from  1815  to  1898.  Bv  the  same  author,  Russia  (Story  of  the 
Nations  Series,  1890),  chaps.  XI-XIV. 

On  the  reign  of  Alexander  I,  the  most  important  work  is  T.  Schie- 
MANN,  Russland  unter  Nikolaus  I,  vol.  I.  This  volume  treats  the  reign 
of  Alexander  I,  though  not  fully.  Chap.  IX,  pp.  351-487,  is  a  remark- 
ably fine  chapter  on  the  conditions  of  Russia  at  that  time.  There  are 
also  chapters  on  Polish  questions  and  a  sketch  of  the  career  of  Nicholas 
before  his  accession.  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas,  vol.  Ill,  chap.  I,  has 
a  valuable  survey  of  the  last  ten  years  of  Alexander's  reign;  consult, 
also,  C.  JoYNEviLLE,  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  I,  3  vols.   (1875). 

On  Nicholas  I:  Schiemann,  work  cited,  vol.  II,  covers  tlie  five  years 
1825  to  1830,  and  contains  many  important  documents;  Stern,  Geschichte 
Europas,  vol.  Ill,  chap.  II;  on  the  beginning  of  the  reign,  1825-1827; 
Bernhardi,  T.,  Unter  Nikolaus  und  Friedrich  Wilhehn  IV  (1893); 
Thouvenel,  L.,  Nicholas  et  NapoUon  III,  1852-1854  (1891);  Haxthau- 
sen.  Etude  sur  les  institutions  nationales  de  la  Russie,  translated  from 
the  German,  3  vols.  (1847-1853)  ;  important  for  its  description  of  the 
mir.  On  the  reforms  of  Alexander  II:  see,  Sir  Donald  ^Mackenzie 
Wallace,  Russia  (revised  edition,  1905),  chaps.  XXVII-XXXIII; 
Anatole  Leroy-Beaulieu,  The  Empire  of  the  Tsars  and  the  Russians, 
translated  by  Z.  A.  Ragozin,  3  vols.  (1893-1896);  vol.  I  devoted  to  the 
country  and  the  people;  vol.  II  to  institutions;  vol.  Ill  to  religion  and 
church  aifairs.  These  two  are  the  best  general  descriptions  of  Russia 
and  contain  a  great  deal  of  history.  See,  also,  for  the  reforms:  Maxime 
KovALEvsKY,  Russian  Political  Institutions  (Chicago,  1902),  chaps.  VI- 
IX.  On  social  unrest  and  nihilism:  Wallace,  chap.  XXXIV;  Leroy- 
Beaulieu,  vol.  II,  Book  VI;  A.  Thun,  Geschichte  der  revolutioniiren 
Bewegungen  in  Russland  (1883) — covers  the  period  from  1863  to  1880 
and  has  a  good  bibliography.  The  writings  of  a  Russian  refugee, 
Stepniak  (pseudonym),  Underground  Russia  (1882),  The  Russian 
Peasant  (1888),  are  important,  as  describing  conditions  and  state  of 
mind  of  the  masses;  also,  Gogol,  Dead  Souls. 

On  the  reign  of  Alexander  III:  see,  H.  von  Samson-Himmelstierna, 
Russia  Under  Alexander  III  (1897);  Charles  Lowe,  Alexander 
III  (1895);  E.  Flourens,  Alexander  III  (1894);  George  Kennan, 
Siberia  and  the  Exile  System,  2  vols.  (4th  edit.,  1897) ;  Pobyedonostseff, 
K.  P.,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  Statesman  (London,  1898). 

On  the  reign  of  Nicholas  II:  consult,  Wallace,  Russia,  chaps. 
XXXVI-XXXIX;      Pierre      Leeoy-Beaulieu,      The      Awakening      of 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  769 

The  East,  Siberia,  Japan,  China  (1900);  for  a  description  of 
the  development  of  Siberia:  Vladimir,  Russia  on  the  Pacific,  and  the 
Siberian  Railwai/  (1899);  M.  M.  Shoemakeh,  The  Great  Siberian  Rail- 
tvay  (1903);  G.  F.  Wright,  Asiatic  Russia,  2  vols.  (1902);  A.  Krausse, 
Russia  in  Asia  (1899),  strongly  partisan,  Russophobe;  Combes  de 
I.ESTRADE,  La  Russie  economique  ei  sociale  a  I'avenement  de  S.  M. 
Nicholas  II  (1896);  M.  Kovalevsky,  Le  regime  Economique  de  la 
Russie  (1898),  and  W.  de  Kovalewsky,  L'AyricuUure  en  Russie  (1897) 
and  La  Russie  a.  la  fin  du  X/Xe  siecle  (1900) ;  Geoffrey  Drage,  Russian 
Afi'airs  (1904).  Stepntak,  King  Log  and  King  Stork,  a  Study  of 
Modern  Russia,  2  vols.  (1895),  and  Prince  Kropotkin,  Memoirs  of  a 
Revolutionist,  2  vols.  (1899),  throw  much  light  on  conditions  of  Russian 
life. 

On  Poland:  see,  Morfill,  Poland  (1893),  (Story  of  the  Nations  Series), 
chaps.  XII-XIV,  and  Brandes,  G.  M.  C,  Poland,  A  Study  of  the  Land, 
People,  and  Literature  (1903),  a  recent  book  by  a  Danish  literary  critic; 
Kovalevsky,  M.,  Russian  Political  Institutions,  chap.  X. 

On  Finland:  J.  R.  Fisher,  Finland  and  the  Tsars,  1S09-1S09  (London, 
1899) ;  F.  Moreau,  La  question  finlandaise  (1900) ;  H.  de  Wukut,  Fin^- 
land  as  It  Is  (London,  1901);  Kovalevsky,  M.,  Russian  Political  Insti- 
tutions, chap.  XL  PL  Norman,  All  the  Russias  (1902),  presents  the 
Russian  side  of  the  Finnish  question,  pp.  84-95. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

The  Far  East 

The  best  English  book  on  the  relations  between  Europe  and  the  East 
is  Sir  Robert  K.  Douglas,  Europe  and  the  Far  East  (1904);  contains 
a  bibliography ;  treats  of  the  opening  of  China  and  Japan  to  Western 
influences,  the  rise  and  re-organization  of  Japan,  the  Asiatic  wars  with. 
European  powers,  the  Chino-Japanese  war,  the  Boxer  insurrection,  etc.; 
comes  down  to  the  outbreak  of  the  Russo-Japanese  war.  An  admirable 
French  book  is  Edouard  Dsiault,  La  Question  d'Extreme  Orient  (1908); 
studies  Chinese  and  Japanese  civilizations,  the  history  of  the  relations 
of  Asia  with  Europe  from  the  sixteenth  to  the  twentieth  century,  gives 
an  account  of  the  Chino-Japanese  and  the  Russo-Japanese  wars  and 
describes  the  jjresent  situation.  Pierre  Leroy-Beaulieu,  The  Awakening 
of  the  East  (1900),  comes  down  to  1899  and  contains  a  good  chapter  on 
Japan  (pp.  81-182),  and  on  China  (pp.  183-289).  For  a  briefer  treat- 
ment: see,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  XI,  chap.  XXVIII.  The 
Library  of  Congress  published  (Washington,  1904)  a  Select  List  of 
Books  Relating  to  the  Far  East. 

On  the  opening  of  China:  see,  Reixsch,  P.  S.,  World  Politics  (1900), 
pp.  8G-257,  very  clear  and  illuminating;  CoLauHouN,  A.  R.,  China  in 
Transformation  (1898);  Smith,  A.  H.,  China  in  Convulsion,  2  vols. 
(1901),  by  an  American,  long  a  missionary  in  China;  Browx,  A.  J., 
New  Forces  in  Old  China  (1904);  Martin,  W.  A.  P.,  The  Awakening 
of  China  (1907).  Cordier,  H.,  Histoire  des  relations  de  la  Chine  avec 
les  puissances  occidentales,  2  vols.  (1901-1902),  covers  the  period  since 
1860.  A.  H.  Smith's  Chinese  Characteristics  (1890)  is  a  very  informing 
book  by  one  who  is  recognized  as  an  authority  on  China.  Morse,  H.  M., 
The  Trade  and  Adrainistration  of  the  Chinese  Empire  (1908),  by  a 
Harvard  graduate,  for  thirty-three  years  resident  in  China. 

On  Japan:  see,  Murray,  D.,  The  Story  of  Japan  (1894),  chaps.  XIII- 
XV;  Griffis,  W.  E.,  Life  of  Matthew  Calbraith  Perry  (1887),  The 
Mikado's  Empire  (10th  edit.,  1903) ;  The  Japanese  Nation  in  Evolution 


770  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

(1907;;  describes  recent  events;  Iyenaga,  The  Constitutional  Develop- 
ment of  Japan  (Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies,  Baltimore,  1891); 
GoLLiKR,  TiiEOPHii.E,  Essui  SHY  les  institutions  politiques  du  Japon 
(Brussels,  1903),  a  good  account  of  the  Japanese  government;  Knox, 
G.  W.,  Imperial  Japan  (1905).  On  the  causes  of  the  Russo-Japanese 
war:  see,  Asakawa,  The  Russo-Japanese  Conflict  (1904).  For  a  list  of 
books  on  the  Russo-Japanese  war:  see.  Statesman's  Year  Book  for  1908, 
p.  1353.  An  important  book  is  Hershey,  A.  S.,  The  International  Law 
and  Diplomacy  of  the  Russo-Japanese  War  (1906);  contains,  among 
others,  excellent  chapters  on  the  causes  of  the  war  and  on  the  Treaty 
of  Portsmouth. 

A  very  interesting  account  by  a  participant  in  one  of  the  great  events 
of  the  war  is  Capt.  Vladimir  Sejienoff,  The  Battle  of  Tsushima  be- 
tween the  Japanese  and  Russian  Fleets,  Fought  on  21th  of  May,  1905. 
Translated  by  A.  B.  Lindsay  (London,  1906,  165  pp.). 

Millard,  T.  A.,  The  New  Far  East  (1907) ;  an  examination  of  the 
present  situation  of  Japan  and  her  relation  to  the  Far  Eastern  Question, 
with  special  reference  to  the  interests  of  the  United  States  and  the 
future  of  China;  contains  chajjters  on  Japan  in  Korea,  in  JManchuria, 
the  New  China,  Japan,  China  and  the  West;  contains,  also,  the  Anglo- 
Japanese  Alliance  of  1905,  the  Treaty  of  Portsmouth,  the  Japanese- 
Korean  Agreement  of  1905. 

Dyer,  Henry,  Japan  pi  World  Politics  (1909),  by  a  professor  emeritus 
in  the  University  of  Tokio;  has  chapters  on  the  Meeting  of  the  Far 
East  and  the  West,  on  the  Rise  of  Japan  as  a  World  Power,  on  the 
Factors  of  National  Life,  on  the  Civilizations  of  the  East  and  the 
West,  etc. 

There  are  many  important  articles  on  Japan  in  the  Encyclopedia 
Americana,  written  by  Japanese  specialists. 

CHAPTER  XXXI 

Russia  Since  the  War  with  Japan 

The  most  useful  description  of  the  events  of  this  period  will  be  found 
in  the  Annual  Register.  Dodd,  Alodcrn  Constitutions,  gives  the  Funda- 
mental Laws  of  the  Russian  Empire  of  May  6th,  1906,  with  useful 
notes.  HarpeRj  S.  N.,  The  Neic  Electoral  Laic  for  the  Russian  Duma 
(Chicago,  1908),  is  an  excellent  description  of  the  present  electoral  law. 
MiLYouKov,  Paul,  Russia  and  Its  Crisis  (Chicago,  1905),  presents  the 
Liberal  theory  of  the  crisis:  a  verj'  instructive  book,  but  confessedly 
one-sided.  Victor  Berard,  The  Russian  Empire  and  Czarism,  trans- 
lated by  G.  Fox-Davies  and  G.  O.  Pope  (1905),  has  certain  chapters 
describing  the  process  of  Russification  attempted  with  the  Poles,  Jews, 
Finns,  and  Armenians.  Other  books  that  may  be  consulted  are: 
Pabes,  B.,  Russia  and  Reform  (1907);  Nevixson,  H.  W.,  The  Dawn  in 
Russia  (1906);  Perris,  G.  H.,  Russia  in  Revolution  (1905);  Martin,  R., 
The  Future  of  Russia  (1906). 

CHAPTER  XXXH 

Certain  Features  of  Modern  Progress 

Interesting  volumes  treating  briefly  certain  general  features  of  the 
last  century,  literature,  science,  art,  industry,  transportation,  etc.,  are: 
The  Progress  of  the  Century,  by  A.  R.  Wallace  and  others  (1901); 
The  Nineteenth  Century:  A  Review  of  Progress  (1901);  Wallace,  A.  R., 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  771 

The  Wonderful  Century:  Its  Successes  and  Its  Failures  (1898).  Day's 
History  of  Commerce  (1907)  treats  liberally  the  nineteenth  century, 
and  has  an  admirable  bibliography  fully  opening  up  the  subject; 
Cochrane,  Modern  Industrial  Progress   (1904),  is  useful. 

Probably  the  most  satisfactory  general  survey  of  the  world  to-day, 
from  the  political  and  economic  point  of  view,  is  E.  Driault,  Le  monde 
actuel  (1909),  an  account  of  very  recent  history  of  the  different  coun- 
tries, and  a  description  of  present  conditions  and  tendencies;  clear, 
suggestive,  interesting.  Another  book  by  the  same  author  is  Les 
probldmes  polHiques  et  sociaux  a  la  fin  du  XIXe  sidcle  (1900).  Vol.  VII 
of  Larned's  History  for  Ready  Reference  is  announced.  It  will  cover 
the  first  decade  of  the  twentieth  century  and  ought  to  prove  useful  for 
recent  history. 

On  the  peace  movement:  see,  Holi.s,  F.  W.,  The  Peace  Conference  at 
the  Hay  lie,  and  Its  Bearings  on  International  Law  and  Policy  (1900); 
an  account  of  the  First  Conference  of  1899  by  a  member  of  the  delega- 
tion of  the  United  States;  Hull,  W.  I.,  The  Ttoo  Hague  Conferences 
and  Their  Contributions  to  International  Law  (1908),  a  comparative 
study  of  the  discussions  and  achievements  of  the  Conferences  of  1899 
and  1907,  well  arranged  and  clearly  presented;  Scott,  J.  B.,  The  Hague 
Peace  Conferences  of  1899  and  1907,  two  elaborate  and  authoritative 
volumes  (1909).  Vol.  I  consists  of  lectures  delivered  at  Johns  Hopkins 
University  by  Scott,  one  of  the  delegates  of  the  United  States  at  the 
conference  of  1907,  lectures  now  much  revised  and  enlarged;  vol.  II  con- 
tains the  official  documents,  the  instructions  to  American  delegates, 
their  official  reports,  and  the  various  texts  drawn  up  at  the  Conferences 
and  ratified  by  the  participating  powers;  Higgins,  A.  P.,  The  Hague 
Peace  Conferences  and  the  Other  International  Conferences  Concerning 
the  Laws  and  Usages  of  War  (Cambridge  University  Press,  1909); 
Foster,  J.  W.,  Arbitration  and  the  Hague  Court  (1904). 

For  current  history,  the  most  useful  aids  are  tlie  various  annuals 
published  in  different  countries:  in  England,  the  Annual  Register,  pub- 
lished since  1758;  in  France,  Viallate,  A.,  La  vie  politique  dans  les  deux 
mondes,  since  1907;  in  Germany,  Schiemann,  T.,  Deutschland  und  die 
grosse  Politik,  since  1903;  Glaser,  F.  W.,  WirtschaftspolUische  Annalen, 
since  1906;  Schulthess,  Etiropiiischer  Oeschichtskalender,  since  1860; 
Aegidi  and  Klauhold,  Das  Staatsarchiv.  Sammlung  der  offiziellen 
Aktenstiicke  zur  Oeschichte  der  Oegenwart,  since  1861.     Now  edited  by 

G.    ROLOFF. 

An  annual  that  seems  likely  to  prove  most  useful  is  the  Jahrbuch  der 
Zeit-  und  Kultitrgeschichte,  containing  chapters  on  the  political  life  of 
Germany  and  other  countries,  on  the  religious  life,  on  economic,  educa- 
tional, literary,  and  scientific  matters,  and  on  art  and  music.  Edited  by 
Dr.  Franz  Schniirer.  The  first  volume,  that  concerning  the  year  1907, 
was  published  in  Freiburg  in  1908. 

Several  special  encyclopaedias  are  of  importance  to  the  student  of 
history:  Palgrave,  Dictionary  of  Political  Economy,  3  vols.  (1900); 
Conrad,  Handworterbuch  der  Staatswissenschaften,  7  vols.  (2nd  edit., 
1898-1901);  Marquardsen,  Handbuch  des  offentlichen  Rechts  der  Gegen- 
wart  in  MonograpMen,  5  vols.  (1883-1906).  What  amounts  to  a  new 
edition  is  announced  under  the  title  Das  offentliche  Recht  der  Gegenwart. 
There  are  certain  monographs  of  value  to  the  historian  in  Staats-und 
sozialwissenschaftliche  Forschungen,  edited  by  Gustav  Schmoller  und 
Max  Sering. 

The  Statesman's  Year  Book  is  an  indispensable  source  of  varied 
statistical  information,  concerning  all  countries.  On  various  aspects  of 
government  and  politics:  see,  Goonxow,  F.  J.,  Comparative  Administra^ 
tive   Law,  2   vols.    (1893),   a   study   of  the  administrative   systems   of 


772  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Germany,  France,  England,  and  the  United  States;  Burgess,  J.  W., 
Political  Science  and  Comfarative  Constitutional  Laio,  2  vols.  (1890),  a 
study  of  tlie  governments  of  Germany,  France,  England,  and  the  United 
States;  Shaw,  Albert,  Municipal  Oovernment  in  Great  Britain  (1895), 
and  Municipal  Government  in  Continental  Europe  (1895);  Munro, 
W.  B.,  The  Government  of  European  Cities  (1909);  Meyer,  G.,  Das 
parlamentarische  Wahlrecht  (1901),  cliiefly  an  account  of  the  suffrage 
in  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  century;  Lefevre-Fontalis,  Les  elections 
en  Europe  a  la  fin  du  XIX^  siecle  (1902),  treats  of  the  electoral  qualifica- 
tions and  modes  of  election  in  the  various  countries  of  Europe; 
Pyfferoen,  O.,  L'electorat  politique  et  administratif  en  Europe  (1903), 
another  account  of  the  various  electoral  systems. 

Publications  which  will  be  found  useful  in  the  study  of  contemporary 
history,  besides  the  more  popular  English  and  American  reviews,  such 
as  the  Fortnightly;  Contemporary;  Nineteenth  Century;  Westminster; 
North  American;  Forum;  Review  of  Reviews;  are:  the  Edinburgh  Re- 
vieiv;  Quarterly  Revieiv;  National  Review;  American  Political  Science 
Review;  Political  Science  Quarterly;  Yale  Revieio;  Annals  of  the 
American  Academy;  Economic  Journal;  Economic  Review;  Quarterly 
Journal  of  Economics;  Socialist  Review;  Survey;  Laiv  Quarterly  Re- 
view; American  Jotirnal  of  International  Law;  Revue  des  deux  mondes; 
Revue  de  Paris;  Revue  bleue;  Le  Correspondant;  Revue  d'histoire 
diplomatique;  Revue  politique  et  parlementaire;  Revue  de  droit  inter- 
national et  de  legislation  comparee;  Archives  cliplomatiques ;  Revue  de 
droit  public  et  science  politique;  Annales  des  sciences  politiques; 
Questions  diplomatiques  et  coloniales;  Revue  generate  de  droit  inter- 
national public;  Journal  des  economistes;  Revue  d'economie  politique; 
Revue  economique  internationale ;  L'economiste  frangais;  Deutsche 
Rundschau;  Preussische  Jahrbiicher;  Jahrbuch  des  ofentlichen  Rechts; 
Archiv  filr  offentliches  Recht;  Zeitschrift  fiir  Volkerrecht  und  Bundes- 
staatsrecht. 


INDEX 


Abbas  II,  Khedive  of  Egypt,  558 

Abd-el-Kadcr,  native  leader  in 
Algeria,  373 

Abdul  Aziz,  Sidtan,  recognizes  the 
Union  of  Moldavia  and  Walla- 
chia,  1862,  618;  deposed  March, 
1S76,  621 

Abdul  Hamid  II,  1876-1909,  ac- 
cession of,  621;  war  with  Russia 
and  Treaty  of  San  Stefano,  623- 
624;  cedes  Thessaly  to  Greece 
(1881),  634.;  and  Crete,  635;  re- 
stores constitution  of  1876,  636, 
637;  deposition  of,  613 

Abdul  Medjid,  Sultan,  and  the 
Crimean  War,  612-616 

Abyssinia,  Italian  war  with,  382- 
384 

Accident  Insurance  Laws  (Ger- 
many), 188.'t  and  1SS5,  316 

Achmet  Agha,  and  the  attack  on 
Batak,  621-622 

Act  of  Federation  (German), 
work  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna, 
29-31 ;  von  Sybel's  estimate  of, 
32;  imsatisfactory  to  Germans, 
32;  Article  XIII  of,  35,  38 

Act  of  Union  (1800),  Great  Brit- 
ain and  Ireland,  497 

Adana,  in  Asia  Minor,  massacres 
in  (1909),  642 

Adrianople,  Treaty  of  (1829), 
611;  entered  by  Russians 
(1878),  624;   642 

Afghanistan,  war  in,  490;  protec- 
torate of  England  over,  523;  as 
a  buffer  between  India  and  Tur- 
kestan,  682 

Africa,  German  trading  stations 
in,  318;  German  colonies  in,  319; 
Senegal,  French  possession 
(1815)  in,  371;  French  conquest 
of  Algeria,  372;  other  French 
conquests  in,  373-375;  Western, 
374;  Italian  possessions  in,  382; 
slavery  in  the  English  colonies 
of,  439,  abolished,  440;  war 
in  South  (1899-1902),  490,  512, 
529;  British  South  Africa,  586- 


Africa,   continued 

545;  partition  of,  550-563;  period 
of  discovery  in,  550-551;  situa- 
tion in  (1815),  551;  French  con- 
quest of  Algeria,  552;  English 
explorations  in,  552-553;  Euro- 
pean appropriations  of  (1884- 
1890),  554;  conference  of  the 
Powers  concerning  (1876),  554; 
International  African  Associa- 
tion, 554;  Congo  Free  State,  554- 
557;  Egypt,  557-563;  Spanish  pos- 
sessions in,  574;  Portuguese  pos- 
sessions in,  578;  possessions  of 
the  Ottoman  Empire  (1815)  in, 
601.  See  British  South  Africa, 
German  East  and  German  South- 
west   Africa,    Western    Africa 

African  Association,  International, 
554;  becomes  International  As- 
sociation of  the  Congo,  555 

Aix  -  la  -  Chapelle,  Congress  of 
(1818),  59;  75 

Alabama  award,  486,  528,  591 

Albania,  602 

Albert  Nyanza,  552 

Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg,  Prince 
Consort,  marriage  of,  to  Queen 
Victoria    (18.',0),  445 

Albert  I,  King  of  Belgium, 
1909—,  583 

Alberta,  admitted  to  the  Dominion 
of  Canada,  1905,  529 

Alessandria,   61 

Alexander  of  Battenberg  (1879), 
Prince  of  Bulgaria,  628;  abdi- 
cates, 630 

Alexander  I,  King  of  Servia,  1889- 
1903,  murder  of,  633 

Alexander  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  1801- 
1825,  and  Bernadotte,  2;  de- 
mands of,  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  6;  Treaty  of  Holy  Al- 
liance, 14,  16;  character  of,  19; 
becomes  conservative,  38,  40; 
and  Charles  X,  92;  and  the  Bel- 
gian revolution,  104;  and  Poland 
(1815),  107,  647-648;  reign  of, 
645-650;   training  of,  646;   posi- 


773 


774 


INDEX 


Alexander  I,  continued 
tion  of,  in  1S15,  647;  progressive 
domestic  policy  of,  ()48;  liljeral 
foreign  policy  of,  649;  becomes 
reactionary  (1820-1825),  108, 
649;  death  of  (1825),  609,  650 

Alexander  II,  Tsar  of  Russia, 
1855-1881,  attitude  of,  toward 
the  Prussian  annexations,  268 
and  note;  and  the  Congress  of 
Berlin,  3:30;  alliance  of  the  Three 
Emperors,  3-21,  616;  and  the 
Crimean  War,  616;  attitude  to- 
ward Turkey,  1876,  623;  de- 
clares war  against  Turkey 
(1877),  623;  accession  and  lib- 
eralism, 655;  prevailing  system 
of  land  tenure  under,  the  mir,  the 
serfs,  655-657;  issues  Edict  of 
Emancipation  (1861),  657;  and 
the  land  problem,  657-660;  estab- 
lishes zemstvos  (1864),  660;  re- 
forms the  judicial  system,  661; 
other  reforms  of,  661 ;  and  the 
Polish  insurrection  of  1863,  662- 
663;  and  the  Russification  of 
Poland,  664-665;  effect  of  the 
Polish  insurrection  upon,  665;  be- 
comes reactionary,  665;  rise  of 
Nihilism  under,  666-668;  at- 
tempts upon  the  life  of,  669; 
assassination  of  (1881),  670 

Alexander  III,  Tsar  of  Russia, 
1881-189-i,  character  and  policy 
of,  670;  influence  of  Pobyedo- 
nostseff  upon,  670-671 ;  persecu- 
tion of  the  Jews  under,  672; 
progressive  features  of  the  reign 
of,  673;  industrial  revolution 
under,  673-674;  appoints  Sergius 
de  Witte,  Minister  of  Commerce 
and  Finance  (1892),  his  policy, 
674-675;  rise  of  labor  problems, 
675;  rise  of  a  rich  bourgeoisie, 
675;   death   (1804),  ^^6 

Alexander  John  I  of  Roumania, 
rule  of,  618;  abdicates,  619.  See 
Couza 

Alexandria,  488,  559 

Alfonso  XII,  King  of  Spain,  1874- 
1885,  becomes  King,  572;  and 
the  Constitution  of  1876,  573; 
death  of,  574 

Alfonso  XIII,  King  of  Spain, 
born  May  17,  1886,  assumes 
power  (1902),  575;  marriage 
with  Princess  Ena  of  Batten- 
berg,  57fi 


Algeria,  98,  275;  Picquart  sent  to, 

359;  in  1815,  551;  French  con- 
quest of,  372,  552 
Algiers,     conquered     by     France, 

132,  372;  in  1815,  602 
Ali  of  Janina,  602 
Alma,  battle  of  the,  614 
Alsace,  Germans  invade,  296;  ceded 

to   Germany  by  the   Treaties  of 

Versailles    and    Frankfort,    300, 

303,  319,  337 
Araadeo    of    Savoy    chosen     King 

of   Spain,   1870,   570;    abdicates, 

571 
American  Commonwealth,  Bryce's, 

Censorship  of,  in  Russia,  678 
Amoy,    opened    to    British     trade 

by    treaty    of    Nanking    (1842), 

685 
Amsterdam,  102 
Amur,    Russia    acquires    northern 

bank  of  the,   from  China,  1858, 

682 
Ancona,  seized  by  France,  111 
Andalusia,  49 

Anesthetics,  discovery  of,  720 
Anglican  Church.     See  Church  of 

England 
Anglo-Japanese    Treaty    of    1902, 

700 
Angouleme,  Duke  of,  leads  French 

army  in  the  invasion   of  Spain, 

1823,    63;    79;    renounces    claim 

to  the  crown,  97 
Annam,    French   protectorate   over 

(1883),   373,   374 
Anti-Corn-Law  League   (1839),  452 
Antiseptics,   720 
Apulia,  Riots  in  (1889),  383 
Arabi    Pasha,    revolt    of,    crushed 

by  England,  559 
Arabia,    Ottoman    Empire    (1815) 

and,  601 
Arbitration,   Permanent  Court  of, 

established   (1899),  732,  736 
Ardahan,  626 
Argentina,    Italian    emigration    to, 

386 
Argj'll,  Duke  of,  on  the  Land  Act 

of  1881,  491 
Arkwright,  407,  722 
Armaments,  Cost  of,  728;  Nicholas 

II  and  the  limitation  of,  729 
Armenia,  Russia  retains  a  part  of 

Turkish,  626 
Army  Reforms,  in  France  (1818), 

76;  (1872),  339;  in  Prussia,  248- 

249,   255;    in   England,    481-482; 


INDEX 


775 


Army  Reforms,  continued 
in    Roumania,    632;    in    Turkey, 
643;    in    Japan,    693;    in    China, 
704 

Arndt,  43;  restored  to  professor- 
ship, 150 

Artois,  Count  of  (afterwards 
Charles  X),  leader  of  the  Ultras 
in  France  in  1815,  72,  74,  79; 
heads  the  party  of  reaction  in 
France,  80.     See  Charles  X 

Ashley,  Lord,  and  the  child  labor 
agitation,  442 

Asia,  French  possessions  in,  374; 
Portuguese  possessions  in,  578; 
Dutch  possessions  in,  581;  Otto- 
man Empire  in  (1815),  601; 
England,  France,  and  Russia  in, 
681 

Asia  Minor,  Mehemet  Ali  in,  131; 
part  of  tlie  Ottoman  Empire 
(1815),  601;  massacres  in 
(1909),  642 

Asquith,  Herbert,  leader  of  the 
Liberal  Party  since  1908,  515; 
and  the  Old  Age  Pensions  Law, 
1908,  515;  and  the  Irish  Univer- 
sity or  Birrell  Act,  1908,  516 

Associations,  Law  of,  1901, 
(France),   366 

Associations  of  Worship  (France), 
1905,  369;  Pius  X  and,  369 

Athens,  captured  by  the  Turks, 
607;  made  capital  of  Greece,  634 

Auckland,  534 

Augustenburg,  Duke  of,  259-260 

Ausgleich  or  Austro-Hungarian 
Compromise  of  1861,  393-396; 
renewed  by  arbitrary  act  of 
Francis  Joseph  I,  404 

Australasia,   534,  545 

Australia,  Ballot  system  of,  adopt- 
ed in  England,  484;  English  pos- 
sessions in,  prior  to  1815,  519; 
early  explorations  in,  530;  voy- 
ages of  Captain  Cook  to,  531 ; 
as  a  convict  colony,  531 ;  dis- 
covery of  gold  in  (1851  and 
1852),  244,  532;  the  Six  Colonies 
of,  532;  creation  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  (1890-1900),  533;  the 
Federal  Parliament  in  (1901), 
534  J  and  the  South  African 
War,  544;  autonomy  in,  546;  and 
the  problem  of  Federation,  547- 
549;  preferential  tariffs,  548. 
See  South  Australia,  Western 
Australia 


Austria,  acquires  Lombardy  and 
Venetia  by  Treaty  of  Paris,  3; 
Emperor  of,  at  Congress  of 
Vienna,  4;  acquisitions  by  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  8-9;  Holy  Alli- 
ance, 14;  signs  Quadruple  Alli- 
ance, 17;  lack  of  unity  in,  23- 
25;  policy  of  Francis  I  and 
Metternich,  25-28;  importance  in 
the  Diet,  30;  jealousy  of  Prus- 
sia, 34;  importance  of  the  Carls- 
bad Conference  to,  43;  domi- 
nance of,  in  Italy,  53;  at  Con- 
gress of  Troppau,  59;  invades 
Italy,  60,  61;  at  Congress  of 
Verona,  62;  recognizes  the 
Kingdom  of  Belgium,  105; 
and  the  revolution  in  Poland, 
106-110;  intervention  in  the 
Papal  States,  111;  and  the 
revolution  in  Germany  (1830), 
112;  and  Turkish  affairs,  132; 
and  the  London  Conference 
(18-iO),  132;  and  the  Zollverein, 
149;  lS15-18.'i8,  152-159;  acces- 
sion of  Ferdinand  I,  152;  the  in- 
dustrial revolution  in,  153;  de- 
velopment of  nationalities  within 
the  Empire — Bohemia,  153; 
Hungary,  154-159;  and  Young 
Italy,  163-166;  Pius  IX  protests 
against  occupation  of  Ferrara  by, 
166;  Kossuth's  speech  against, 
169;  accepts  Hungarian  plan  of 
autonomy,  171;  grants  auton- 
omy to  Bohemia,  172;  Constitu- 
tion for  the  Empire  granted, 
172;  revolution  in  Lombardy- 
Venetia,  172;  Italy  renounces 
the  control  of,  173;  March 
(1848)  revolutions  triumphant 
in,  174;  begins  the  work  of  res- 
toration, 175;  riots  in  Prague, 
175;  conquers  Bohemia,  175; 
partially  conquers  Italy,  175;  ex- 
ploits the  situation  in  Hungary, 
177;  Ferdinand  declares  Hun- 
garian Diet  dissolved,  178;  out- 
break in  Vienna,  178;  flight  of 
Ferdinand  to  Olmiitz,  178; 
Windischgrjitz  conquers  Vienna, 
178;  abdication  of  Ferdinand 
and  accession  of  his  nephew 
Francis  Joseph  I,  who  retracts 
the  March  Laws,  179;  war  with 
Hungary,  179;  conquers  Hun- 
gary, 180;  completes  conquest 
of     Italy,     181;     crushes     Lom- 


776 


INDEX 


Austria,    continued 

bardy,  181;  overthrows  Sar- 
dinian army  at  Novara,  181 ; 
surrender  of  Venice  to,  182;  re- 
jects the  work  of  the  Frankfort 
Parliament,  185;  the  "  humiliation 
of  Olmiitz,"  185;  restores  Diet  of 
Frankfort  (1S51),  185;  reaction 
in  Italy  after  18^8,  215;  indicted 
at  Congress  of  Paris  by  Cavour, 
220;  conspiracy  against,  at  Plom- 
bieres,  223;  Austro-Sardinian 
war,  225;  defeated  at  battles 
of  Magenta  and  Solferino,  225; 
peace  concluded  with  France  and 
Sardinia  at  Villafranca,  225;  to 
be  a  member  of  the  projected 
Italian  Confederation,  228;  re- 
action in,  1850-1859,  240;  Bis- 
marck's attitude  toward,  253  and 
254;  M'ith  Prussia  declares  war 
against  Denmark,  258;  secures 
Schleswig-Holstein  and  Lauen- 
burg  in  conjunction  with  Prussia 
by  the  Treaty  of  Vienna  (1864), 
259,  593;  convention  of  Gastein, 
259;  war  with  Prussia,  263;  vic- 
tories of  Custozza  and  Lissa,  265; 
defeated  by  Prussia  at  Konig- 
gr;itz,  265;  causes  of  defeat  of, 
265;  terms  of  peace  with  Prus- 
sia, 267;  cedes  Venetia  to  Italy, 
267;  neutrality  of,  in  Franco- 
German  war,  294;  Austro-Ger- 
man  treaty  of  1879,  321;  Triple 
AUiance  (1882),  321,  382;  Aus- 
tria to  the  Compromise  of  1861, 
388-396 ;  punishment  of  Hungary 
(1849),  388;  constitution  of 
1849  revoked,  388;  failure  of  the 
war  in  Italy  (1859),  389;  forced 
to  cede  Lombardy  to  Piedmont, 
389;  becomes  a  constitutional 
state,  390;  Hungary  refuses  to 
cooperate  with,  and  demands  the 
restoration  of  her  constitution  of 
1848,  390-392;  deadlock  with 
Hungary,  1861-1865,  393;  Francis 
Joseph  I  yields,  393;  Compromise 
of  1867,  393-396;  constitution  of, 
395;  Germans  the  dominant  race 
in,  395;  divisive  eifect  of  the 
principle  of  nationalitv  in,  396; 
Empire  of,  since  1867',  396-402; 
liberal  legislation  in,  since  1867, 
396-397;  demands  of  the  Czechs, 
397;  opposition  of  Austrian  Ger- 
mans   and    Magyars,    398;    elec- 


Austria,  continued 
toral  reform  in,  399;  composi- 
tion of  the  Reichsrath,  399;  the 
Taaffe  ministry,  1879-1893,  400; 
Slavs  favored,  400;  social  legis- 
lation, 400;  Workingmen's  In- 
surance, 400;  division  among  the 
Czechs,  401;  fall  of  the  Taaffe 
ministry,  401 ;  electoral  reform 
(1896),  401;  universal  suffrage 
established  (1907),  402;  signs 
Treaty  of  Paris  (1856),  616; 
joins  England  in  demanding  a 
revision  of  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano,  625;  by  Congress  of 
Berlin,  1878,  invited  to  "  oc- 
cupy and  administer "  Bosnia 
and  Herzegovina,  320,  626;  stops 
war  between  Bulgaria  and 
Servia,  C29;  secret  treaty  with 
Russia,  640;  attitude  of,  toward 
the  breaches  of  the  Berlin  Treaty 
(1878),  629,  640,  See  Austria- 
Hungary 

Austria-Hungary,  since  1849, 
388-405;  Ausgleich,  393;  the 
Delegations,  394;  divisive  effect 
of  the  principle  of  nationality  in, 
396;  and  Bosnia  and  Herzego- 
vina, 404-405;  at  the  Conference 
of  the  Powers  (1876),  554;  at 
the  Congress  of  Berlin  (1884- 
1885),  555;  annexes  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina,   1908,   639-640,   644 

Austro-German  Treaty  (1879),  321 

Austro-Hungarian  War  (1849), 
179-180 

Austro-Prussian  War  (1866),  263- 
267 

Austro-Sardinian  War  (1859), 
225-227 

Azeglio.      See    D'Azeglio 

Azores,  part  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Portugal,  578 

Baden,  granted  constitution 
(1818),  37;  supports  Austria  in 
the  war  of  1866,  263;  joins  Prus- 
sia in  the  Franco-German  War 
(1870),    294 

Baker,  Sir  Samuel,  English  ex- 
plorer, discovers  one  source  of 
the  Nile,  552 

Bakounine,  and  Socialism,  667 

Balaklava,  battle  of,  614 

Balbo,  Cesare,  1789-1853,  author 
of  "Hopes  of  Italy"  (1844), 
165 


INDEX 


777 


Balfour,  Arthur  James,  Chief 
Secretary  for  Ireland  during  the 
Second  Salisbury  Ministry 
(18S6-18D2),  policy  of  coercion 
in  Ireland,  505;  becomes  Prime 
Minister  (1D02),  511;  on  the 
death  of  Queen  Victoria,  513 

Balkan  Peninsula,  events  in,  1S76- 
1S7S,  320;  1815,  part  of  the  Ot- 
toman  Empire,  (iOl 

Balkan   States,   Rise  of,  601-644 

Ballot,  Introduction  of,  in  Eng- 
land by  Ballot  Law  of  1S72,  483; 
Lord  Palmerston  on,  483;  Glad- 
stone on,  483;  Morley  on,  483 

Baltic  Provinces  of  Russia,  645, 
Russification  of,  67.? 

Baluchistan,  England  and,  523 

Bangweolo,  Lake,  discovered  by 
Livingstone,  552 

Baratieri,  Italian  General,  defeat- 
ed by  Menelek,  383 

Barbary    States,   372-373 

Barcelona,  49 

Bardine,  Sophie,  668 

Baring,  Sir  Evelyn,  later  Lord 
Cromer,  communication  to,  from 
Lord  Granville  concerning  Eng- 
land's position  in  Egj^it,  560 

Bashi-Bazouks,  in  the  Bulgarian 
Atrocities,   621 

Batak,  atrocities  in,  621-622 

Batoum,  626 

Battenberg,  Princess  Ena  of,  mar- 
ries Alfonso  XIII  of  Spain 
(1906),  575;  Alexander  of, 
chosen  Prince  of  Bulgaria 
(1879),   628 

Baudin,  republican  deputy,  281 

Bavaria,  King  of,  at  Congress  of 
Vienna,  4;  importance  of,  in  the 
Diet,  30;  granted  constitution 
(1S18),  37;  economic  growth  of, 
1849-1858,  244;  supports  Austria 
in  the  War  of  1866,  263;  army 
of,  defeated  at  Kissingen,  265; 
joins  Prussia  in  the  Franco- 
Prussian  "War,  294;  becomes 
part  of  the  German  Empire,  301 ; 
Louis  I  and  the  Greek  War  of 
Independence,  608;  611 

Bazaine,  295;  commander  at  Metz, 
296 

Beaconsfield,  Lord.     See  Disraeli 

Beauharnais,   Eugene,  51 

Beauharnais,  Hortense  (daughter 
of  the  Empress  Josephine),  127 

Bebel,  Socialist  leader,  313 


Belfast,  484;  university  at,  for 
Protestants,  516 

Belfort,  295 

Belgium,  annexed  to  Holland,  3, 
5;  rise  of  the  Kingdom  of,  101- 
106;  difficulties  concerning  the 
constitution,  102-103;  influence  of 
the  July  Revolution  in  (1830), 
103-104;  the  Belgians  declare 
their  independence,  104;  Leo- 
pold of  Coburg  elected  King  of, 
104;  recognition  of  the  King- 
dom of,  105;  and  Congo  Free 
State,  554-557,  583;  reign  of 
Leopold  I  of  (1831-1865),  581- 
582;  reign  of  Leopold  II 
(1865-1909),  582;  extension  of 
the  suffrage  (1893),  582;  estab- 
lishes trade  centers  at  the  five 
treaty  ports  of  China,  686 

Belgrade,  capital  of  Servia,  604 

Bell,  Alexander  Graham,  invents 
the  telephone  (1876),  726 

Benedek,  Austrian  commander 
(1866),   264' 

Benedetti,  French  ambassador  to 
Prussia,  interview  with  the  King 
of  Prussia  at  Ems,  291-292 

Bengal,  519,  520 

Bentham,  Jeremy,  417 

Beresford,   Lvord,  in  Portugal,  575 

Berlin,  news  of  the  Revolution  of 
18-'f8  in  Paris  reaches,  152;  revolu- 
tionary movement  of  March, 
18Ii8,  in,  173;  police  regulation 
of  1851  in,  241 ;  becomes  the 
capital  of  united  Germany,  302; 
representation  in  the  Reichstag, 
325,  327;  representation  in  the 
Prussian  Parliament,  326;  Con- 
gress of  188f,-1885,  555;  Berlin 
Act,  1885,  555-556;  Memoran- 
dum, 1876,  620;  Congress  of, 
187 8,  320,  405,  625-626 

Berlin  Act  of  1885,  555;  Leopold 
II   and,  556 

Berlin  Conference,  188^1885,  con- 
cerning Congo  Free  State,  555 

Berlin  Congress  of  1878,  320, 
405,  625-626;  the  Powers  do 
not  prevent  the  breaches  in 
the  Berlin  Treaty,  629,  640,  644 

Berlin  Memorandum,  1876,  620 

Bern,  584;  chosen  capital  of 
Switzerland,  18.'t8,  587 

Bernadotte,  Crown  Prince  of 
Sweden,  2;  sent  into  Norway, 
595.     See  Charles   XIV 


778 


INDEX 


Bernhardi,  243 

Berry,  Duchess  of,  94,  122-123 

Berry,  Duke  of.  Murder  of,  79; 
birth  of  posthumous  son,  82,  97 

Bessarabia,  retained  by  Russia  at 
Congress  of  Vienna,  8;  part  of, 
ceded  to  Moldavia  by  Treaty  of 
Paris  (1856),  615;  Russia  recov- 
ers a  part  of,  616;  ceded  to 
Russia  by  Treaty  of  San  Stef- 
ano,  1878,  625;  cession  of,  reaf- 
firmed by  Congress  of  Berlin, 
1878,  626 

Bethmann-HoUweg,  German  Chan- 
cellor, July,  1909 ,  323 

Biarritz,  Interview  at   (1865),  260 

Birrell  Act,  1908,  516 

Bismarck,  Otto  von,  224,  242,  243; 
and  German  Unity,  240-271 ;  ap- 
pointed President  of  the  Minis- 
try, 1862,  250;  previous  career, 
251;  political  opinions  of,  251; 
attitude  toward  parliamentary 
institutions,  252;  hatred  of  de- 
mocracj^  253;  in  the  Diet,  254; 
attitude  toward  Austria,  253  and 
254;  carries  through  the  army 
reform,  255;  policy  of  "blood 
and  iron,"  255;  diplomacy  con- 
cerning Schleswig-Holstein,  257; 
and  the  Convention  of  Gastein, 
259-260;  conference  with  Na- 
poleon III  at  Biarritz  (1865), 
260;  286;  treaty  of  alliance  with 
Italy,  261;  proposes  a  reform  of 
the  confederation,  262;  orders 
Prussian  troops  to  enter  Holstein, 
263;  at  Kdniggratz,  265;  and  the 
Prussian  Parliament,  268;  author 
of  the  constitution  of  the  North 
German  Confederation,  268-270; 
forms  alliance  with  South  Ger- 
man States,  270;  the  consolida- 
tion of  the  new  system,  270; 
attitude  toward  Napoleon  Ill's 
projects  for  the  acquisition  of 
territory,  1866-1867,  288;  and 
the  candidacy  of  Prince  Leopold, 
290-292;  the' Ems  despatch,  292; 
diplomacy  of,  completely  isolates 
France,  294;  arranges  terms 
of  peace  with  Thiers  at 
Versailles,  300;  German  unifica- 
tion completed,  301 ;  becomes 
Chancellor,  305;  and  the  Kultur- 
kampf,  306-310;  and  the  Falk 
Laws,  308;  and  the  policy  of  pro- 
tection,  310-312;    and    Socialism, 


Bismarck,  Otto  von,  continued 
312-318;  policy  of  State  Social- 
ism and  measures  carried,  316; 
his  contribution  to  the  solution 
of  the  social  question,  317;  So- 
cialists fail  to  cooperate  with, 
317;  and  the  acquisition  of 
colonies,  318-319;  and  the  Triple 
Alliance,  319-320;  and  the 
Austro-German  treaty  of  1879, 
321;  resigns  (1890),  323;  death 
of  (1898),  323;  594;  President 
of  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  1878, 
625 

Black  Sea,  neutralized  by  Treaty 
of  Paris  (1856),  615;  Russia  dis- 
regards neutrality  of,  616 

Blanc,  Louis,  Theories  of,  138,  189; 
143;  in  the  Provisional  Govern- 
ment, 188;  conception  of  the  Re- 
public, 188;  appointed  head  of 
the    Labor    Commission,    191-192 

"Bloc,"  The,  364 

Bloemfontein,  538;  convention  of, 
538;  conferences  at,  1899,  543 

Bliicher,  on  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  11 

Board  Schools  (England),  estab- 
lished, 479;  boards  abolished,  514 

Boer  War,  1899-1902,  512.  See 
British  South  Africa 

Boers,  migration  of,  into  Natal, 
537;  and  the  founding  of  the 
Transvaal,  538;  at  Majuba  Hill, 
539;  and  the  Pretoria  Conven- 
tion, 1881,  540;  and  the  Lon- 
don Convention,  ISS-i,  540;  de- 
sire unqualified  independence, 
540;  and  the  Uitlanders,  541;  Sir 
Alfred  Milner  on,  542;  and  the 
South  African  War,  543 

Bohemia,  a  part  of  the  Austrian 
Empire,  23;  condition  of  the 
peasants  in,  26;  development  of 
nationality  in,  Czech  movement, 
153;  revolution  in,  171,  388;  in- 
vasion of,  by  Prussia  (1866),  265; 
position  in  the  Empire  (1861), 
390;  demands  of  the  Czechs 
(1868),  397;  concessions  to 
Czechs  in,  400;  division  among 
Czechs  in,  401 

Bokhara,  682 

Bologna,  insurrection  in,  1831,  110 

Bombay,  English  possession,  519 

Bonapartists   (France),  127,  344 

Bordeaux,  Napoleon  Ill's  speech 
at,  213;  seat  of  government  dur- 


INDEX 


779 


Bordeaux,  continued 
ing  a  part  of  the  siege  of  Paris, 
298;  French  National  Assembly- 
meets  at  (1871),  SOO,  329;  Treaty 
of  Frankfort  ratified  by  Assem- 
bly at,  301 

Bordeaux,  Duke  of,  97,  98,  117, 
122.  See  also  Count  of  Chara- 
bord 

Borneo,  581 

Borny,  Germans  defeat  French 
at,   296 

Bosnia,  occupied  by  Austria,  320; 
Slavs  of,  aid  Herzegovina 
(1875),  620;  annexed  by  Aus- 
tria-Hungary (1908),  404,  639- 
640 

Botany   Bay,   531 

Botha,  Louis,  in  the  South  Afri- 
can War,  543 

Boulanger,  General,  Minister  of 
War  (1886),  ambition  of,  356; 
trial  and  flight  of,  357 

Boulogne,  Louis  Napoleon  at,  129, 
199 

Bourbon,  now  called  Reunion, 
Island  of,  owned  by  France, 
1815,   371 

Bourbons,  Restoration  of,  3,  66-99, 
119;  Bourbon  line  in  Spain,  565, 
569 

Bourgeois,  Emile,  address  at  the 
First  Peace  Conference  at  the 
Hague  (1899),  731 

Bourmont,  Minister  of  War,  90 

"Boxer "  movement,  1900,  698 

Brandenburg,  251 

Brazil,  flight  of  the  royal  family 
of  Portugal  to,  1807,  575;  Dom 
Pedro  regent  of,  576;  declared 
an  independent  empire  under 
Dom  Pedro  I,  1822,  576;  rec- 
ognized by  Portugal,  1825, 
576 

Bremen,  member  of  North  Ger- 
man Confederation,  268;  mem- 
ber of  German  Empire,  304; 
merchants  from,  establish  trad- 
ing stations,  318 

Briand,  Minister  of  Public  Wor- 
ship, and  the  enforcement  of  the 
Law  of  1905,  370 

Bright,  John,  and  the  Anti-Corn- 
Law  League,  452;  on  the  Irish 
Famine  (18.',5),  453;  and  the  Re- 
form Bill  of  1867,  463;  in  the 
Gladstone  Ministry,  1868,  465; 
the   Bright  clauses   in   the   Irish 


Bright,  John,  continued 

Land  Act  of  1870,  475;  on  the 
Forster  Education  Act  of 
1870,  481;  attitude  toward 
Irish  University  Bill  of  1873, 
485;  opposition  to  the  Irish 
Home  Rule  and  Land  Bills, 
503;  becomes  a  Liberal  Unionist, 
504 

Brisson  Ministry,  and  the  Dreyfus 
case,  360-363 

British  Columbia,  responsible  gov- 
ernment granted  to,  1871,  527; 
admitted  into  the  Dominion  of 
Canada,  1871,  529 

British  Empire.     See  England 

British  Empire  in  the  Nineteenth 
Century,   The,   518-549 

British  North  America,  523-530; 
Act  (1867),  528 

British  South  Africa,  536-545; 
England  acquires  Cape  Colony, 
536;  friction  with  the  Boers, 
537;  the  Great  Trek,  1836 — , 
537;  founding  of  the  Transvaal, 
538;  Transvaal  annexed  to  Great 
Britain,  1877,  538;  Majuba  Hill, 
539;  Pretoria  Convention,  1881, 
540;  London  Convention,  1884, 
540;  discovery  of  gold  in  the 
Transvaal,  188^,  541;  Jameson 
Raid,  1895,  541 ;  Sir  Alfred  Mil- 
ner's  Reports  on,  1899,  542; 
South  African  War,  1899-1902, 
543-544;  annexation  of  the  Trans- 
vaal and  the  Orange  Free  State 
to  the  Britl.sh  Empire,  1902,  544; 
Union  of  South  Africa,  1909, 
544-545;  autonomy  in,  546;  and 
the  problem  of  imperial  federa- 
tion, 547 

Broglie,  Achille  Charles,  Duke  of, 
87,   120,   130 

Broglie,  Jacques  Victor,  ministry 
of,  349 

Brougham,   Lord   Chancellor,   436 

Brunswick,  revolutionary  move- 
ments in  (1830),  112;  147;  in 
the  North  German  Confedera- 
tion, 269 

Brussels,  102;  riot  in  (1830),  104; 
seat  of  the  International  African 
Association,  554 

Bryce,  James,  on  the  advan- 
tages of  federation  to  the  Aus- 
tralians, 533;  American  Com- 
monwealth, censorship  of,  in 
Russia,  678 


780 


INDEX 


Bucharest,  capital  of  Rouraania, 
618;  Treaty  of,  1S86,  629 

Budapest,  171,  177,  394,  395 

Bukharest.     See   Bucharest 

Bulgaria,  Slavs  of,  aid  Herzego- 
vina, 1875,  620;  atrocities  in, 
1S76,  621;  siege  of  Plevna,  623; 
by  Treaty  of  San  Stefano,  1S7S, 
made  a  self-governing  state  trib- 
utary to  the  Sultan,  624;  ter- 
ritory of,  624;  disposition  of,  by 
Congress  of  Berlin,  1S78,  625; 
since  1878,  626-631;  Alexander 
of  Battenberg  chosen  Prince  of, 
1879,  628;  friction  between  the 
Bulgarians  and  the  Russians, 
628;  Union  of  the  two  Bul- 
garias,  1885,  626,  629;  Servia  de- 
clares war  upon,  629;  expels  the 
Servians,  629;  Treaty  of  Bucha- 
rest, 1886,  629;  abdication  of 
Prince  Alexander,  630;  election 
of  Ferdinand  of  Saxe-Coburg 
(1887),  630;  dictatorship  of 
Stambuloif,  630;  election  of 
Ferdinand  recognized  by  the 
Powers,  631 ;  declares  her  inde- 
pendence, October  5,  1908,  631, 
639,  644;  attitude  toward  Tur- 
key, 1908,  G41 ;  and  armed  peace, 
732 

"  Bulgarian  Horrors  and  the  Ques- 
tion of  the  East,"  by  Gladstone, 
622 

Bulgars,  The,  603    (note) 

Buliguin,   710 

Biilow,  von,  German  Chancellor, 
1900-1909,  323 

Bundesrath,  269,  303-304 

Bunsen,  242 

Burke,  Thomas,  assassinated 
(1882),  499 

Burma,  annexed  by  England,  523; 
English   control   of,   681 

Burschenschaft,  The,  39-42 

Bute,  412 

Butt,  first  leader  of  the  Irish 
Home   Rulers,   498 

Buxton,  and  the  anti-slavery  agita- 
tion, 440 

Byron,  Lord,  and  the  Greek  War 
of  Independence,  608 

"  Cadets,"  Constitutional  Demo- 
cratic Party  in  Russia,  713 

Cadiz,  48;  meeting  of  Cortes  at, 
63;  siege  of,  63 

Cairo,  559 


Cambodia,  Kingdom  of,  France  es- 
tablishes protectorate  over,  373 

Cambridge,  local  government  in 
(1832),  443;  University  of,  415, 
485 

Cameron,  African  explorer,  553 

Campbell-Bannerman,  Sir  Henry, 
leader  of  the  Liberal  Party, 
1905-1908,  515 

Canada,  an  English  possession 
(1815),  519;  constitutional  diffi- 
culty in  Upper  and  Lower,  523- 
525;  rebellion  of  1837  in,  446, 
525;  the  Durham  Mission  and 
Report  on,  525-527;  fusion  of 
Upper  and  Lower  (18-',0),  527; 
introduction  of  ministerial  re- 
sponsibility in  (18^7),  527; 
founding  of  Dominion  of 
(1867),  528;  Parliament  of  the 
Dominion  of,  529;  growth  of  the 
Dominion  of,  529;  Dominion  of, 
purchases  Hudson  Bav  Terri- 
tory (1869),  529;  Alberta  and 
Saskatchewan  admitted  into  the 
Dominion  (1905),  529;  relation 
of,  to  England,  529;  Canadian 
Pacific  Railwav,  530;  and  the 
South  African 'war  (1899),  544; 
autonomy  in,  546;  and  the  prob- 
lem of  federation,  547;  preferen- 
tial tariffs,  548 

Canary  Islands,  relation  of,  to 
Spain,  574 

Canning,  64-65;  Foreign  Secretary 
(1822),  422;  detaches  England 
from  Holy  Alliance,  423;  recog- 
nizes independence  of  the  Span- 
ish colonies  in  America,  423;  and 
Catholic  Emancipation,  426;  and 
the  Greek  War  of  Independence, 
608,  610 

Canovas,  leader  of  the  Conserva- 
tives in  Spain,  1876,  573 

Canton,  684,  685,  686 

Cape  Colony,  retained  by  Eng- 
land, 1815,  9,  536,  551;  responsi- 
ble government  granted  to,  1872, 
528;  the  Great  Trek,  537;  542; 
and  the  South  African  War, 
1899,  544 

Cape  of  Good  Hope,  488;  acquired 
by  England,  519;  position  in  the 
South  African  Union,  1909,  544- 
545 

Cape  Town,  545 

Caprivi,  German  Chancellor,  1890- 
189-i,  323 


INDEX 


781 


Capuca,  236;  Francis  II  defeated 
at,  337 

Carbonari,  in  France,  91,  95;  in 
Italy,  56,  110,  159,  161,  232 

Carlists,  Wars  of  the,  566-568,  572 

Carlos,  Don,  claim  to  the  throne 
of   Spain,   565;   Carlist  war,  566 

Carlos  I  of  Portugal,  1SS9-1908, 
577;  assassinated,  I'JOS,  577 

Carlotta,  wife  of  Maximilian, 
Archduke  of  Austria,  279 

Carlsbad  Decrees,  41-44,  112 

Carlstad,  Treaty  of,  1905,  599-600 

Carlyle,  on  Queen  Victoria's  acces- 
sion, 445;  on  Chartism,  450;  on 
the  Reform  Bill  of  1SG7,  464;  on 
the  Great  Western,  724 

"  Carmen  Sylva,"  Queen  Elizabeth 
of  Roumania,  G19 

Carnot,  becomes  President  of  the 
French  Republic  (18S7),  355; 
assassinated    (lS9/f),  358 

Caroline  Islands,  purchased  by 
Germany  from  Spain  (1S99),  319 

Carrara,  223 

Cartwright,  407,  722 

Casimir-P^rier,  on  the  Press  in 
France,  88;  and  the  conserva- 
tives, 130-122,  130;  grandson  of, 
elected  President  of  French  Re- 
public  (ISd-'i),  358;  resigns,  358 

Cassel,  264 

Castelar,  on  the  establishment  of 
a  republic  in  Spain,  571;  572 

Castelfidardo,  battle  of,  236 

Castille,  565;  Carlists  in,  567 

Castlereagh,   15 

Catherine  II  of  Russia,  601 

Catholic  Church  (Roman)  and  the 
government  of  Rome  after  1815, 
55;  the  religion  of  the  state  in 
France  (1814),  69;  French  ex- 
pedition to  Rome  (18-'t9),  182; 
abolition  of  the  temporal  power 
of  the  Pope  of,  301 ;  struggle 
with  the  German  Empire,  305; 
and  the  Kulturkampf,  306-310; 
dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  in, 
307;  the  Old  Catholics,  307; 
and  the  Falk  Laws,  308-309 ;  and 
the  Third  Republic,  349 ;  question 
of,  and  State  in  France,  365; 
Law  of  Associations  (1901)  in 
France,  366 ;  religious  orders  for- 
bidden to  engage  in  teaching  in 
France,  366;  and  the  Concordat 
of  1801,  367;  anticlerical  legis- 
lation in  France,  1881-1903,  367; 


Catholic  Church  (Roman),  corv- 
tinued 

attitude  of  the  clergy  of,  in  the 
Dreyfus  affair,  368;  Pius  X 
protests  against  the  visit  of 
President  Loubet  of  France  to 
Victor  Emmanuel  III,  368;  and 
the  abrogation  of  the  Concordat, 
368;  and  the  Associations  of 
Worship  in  France  (1905),  369; 
Pius  X  and  the  Associations,  369; 
French  Law  of  January  2, 
1901,  370;  sejjaration  of,  and 
State  in  France,  370;  relation 
of,  and  State  in  Italy,  378; 
Law  of  Papal  Guarantees,  378; 
the  Curia  Romana,  379;  powers 
of,  restricted  in  Austria,  396- 
397;  in  Spain,  575;  in  Belgium, 
583 

Catholic  Emancipation  (England), 
1829,  428 

Cavaignac,  Jacques  Marie  Eugene, 
son  of  Louis  Eugene  Cavaignac, 
Minister  of  War,  360;  speech  of, 
concerning  the  Dreyfus  case,  361 

Cavaignac,  General  Louis  Eugene, 
99;  Dictatorship  of,  during  the 
June  Days,  194;  candidate  for 
the  presidency  of  the  republic, 
199 

Cavendish,  Lord  Frederick,  assas- 
sinated, 499 

Cavite,  battle  of,  574 

Cavour,  Count  Camillo  di,  and  the 
Creation  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Italy,  215-239;  and  Napoleon 
III,  215-227;  early  life,  216;  his 
interest  in  political  and  economic 
questions,  217;  becomes  an  edi- 
tor, 217;  prime  minister  (1852), 
217  i  policy  of  economic  develop- 
ment, 218;  Crimean  policy,  219; 
at  the  Congress  of  Paris,  220; 
and  army  reform,  221 ;  interview 
at  Plombiferes  with  Napoleon 
III,  222;  Austro-Sardinian  War, 
225;  displeasure  at  the  terms  of 
Villafranca  and  resignation,  227; 
returns  to  office,  230;  bargain 
with  Napoleon  III  concerning 
Savoy  and  Nice,  230-232;  policy 
concerning  Garibaldi's  expedi- 
tion, 234-237 ;  and  the  question  of 
Rome  and  the  Kingdom  of  Italy, 
238;  death  of,  239;  characteriza- 
tion of,  239;  on  problems  con- 
fronting the  new  kingdom,  376, 


782 


INDEX 


Cavour,  Count  Camillo  di,  con- 
tinued 

377;  attitude  toward  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  378;  387 

Cawnpore,  52\ 

Central  Europe,  between  two  Revo- 
lutions, 145-168;  in  Revolt,  169- 
186 

Certain  Features  of  Modern 
Progress,  719-736 

Ceylon,  English  possession  (1815), 
9,  519;  559 

Chalons,  MacMahon  retreats  to,  296 

Chamberlain,  Joseph,  becomes  a 
Liberal-Unionist,  504;  and  the 
Second  Home  Rule  Bill,  509;  in 
the  Colonial  Office,  511;  and  im- 
perialism, 511;  and  preferential 
duties,  548;  and  the  Colonial 
conferences,  548 

Chambord,  Count  of  (Duke  of 
Bordeaux),  grandson  of  Charles 
X,  97;  and  the  Legitimists,  341, 
342 

Charles  Albert,  Prince  of  Cari- 
gnan,  61 ;  King  of  Piedmont,  164, 
166;  reforms  of,  167;  defeated  at 
Custozza,  176;  abdication  of,  181; 
death  of,  182;  grants  Constitu- 
tional Statute  (ISlfS),  185,  215 

Charles  Felix,  61-62 

Charles  I  of  Roumania,  1866 — ; 
reign  of,  619-620,  632 

Charles  IV  of  Spain,  565 

Charles  X,  King  of  France  (182.'t- 
1830),  reign  of,  83-97;  policy  of, 
83-89;  defeat  of  Villele's  minis- 
try, 89;  Martignac  ministry,  89; 
Polignac  ministry,  90-91 ;  con- 
flict with  the  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties, 91;  dissolves  the  Chamber, 
91;  Ordinances  of  July  (1830), 
92;  his  interpretation  of  the 
Charter,  93;  and  the  July  Revo- 
lution, 95;  abdicates,  97;  retires 
to  England,  97;  death  of 
(1836),  98.  See  also  Artois, 
Count  of 

Charles  XIII,  King  of  Norway  and 
Sweden,  adopts  Bernadotte,  as 
Crown  Prince,  596;  598 

Charles  XIV,  181S-18U,  King  of 
Norway  and  Sweden,  reign  of, 
596-597.     See  Bernadotte 

Charles  XV,  King  of  Norwav  and 
Sweden,  1859-1872,  Constitution 
of  1866,  597 

Chartist  Movement,  446-450 


Chateaubriand,  88;  and  the  Greek 
War  of  Independence,  608 

Child  Labor  (England),  440-442; 
Factory  Act  (1833)  regulating, 
442;  Labor  in  Mines  Act,  455- 
456;  Factory  Act  (18U),  456; 
Factory  and  Workshop  Con- 
solidation Act  of  1878,  456-457; 
Factory  and  Workshop  Act  of 
IDOl,  457;  506 

China,  518;  Russia  acquires  the 
northern  bank  of  the  Amur 
(1858)  and  the  Maritime  Prov- 
ince (1860)  from,  682;  civiliza- 
tion of,  683;  government  of,  684; 
isolation  of,  684;  Opium  War, 
18-',0-18',2,  685;  signs  Treaty  of 
Nanking  (18Jf2)  opening  four 
ports  to  British  trade,  685; 
entrance  of  various  powers  into 
commercial  relations  with,  686; 
France  joins  England  in  war 
against,  686;  Treaties  of  Tientsin 
(1858),  686;  confirmed  (1860), 
687;  Japan's  war  with  (189-i), 
695;  signs  Treaty  of  Shimonoseki 
(1895),  696;  intervention  of 
Russia,  France,  and  Germany  in, 
696;  Russia  secures  rights  in 
Manchuria  from,  697;  Germany 
establishes  a  "  sphere  of  influ- 
ence"  in  (1898),  697;  the 
"  Boxer "  movement  in  (1900), 
698;  influence  of  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War  upon,  703;  reform 
in,  704;  promise  of  constitution 
to,  705 

Chino-Japanese  War,  189.^,  695-696 

Chios,  Turkish  massacre  in,  607 

Christian  Frederick,  elected  King 
of  Norway,  May  17,  181-i,  abdi- 
cates  October   7,   181-',,   596 

Christian  VIII,  King  of  Denmark, 
1839-1848,  593 

Christian  IX,  King  of  Denmark, 
1863-1906,  succeeds  Frederick 
VII,  257;  and  Schleswig-Hol- 
stein,  593;  war  with  Prussia  and 
Austria  and  Treaty  of  Vienna 
(186-'t),  259,  593;'  revision  of 
Constitution  of  18^9  (1866),  594 

Cbristiania,  capital  of  Norway,  596 

Christina,  wife  of  Ferdinand  VII 
of  Spain,  Regent  of  Spain, 
1833-1840,  566;  grants  the 
Royal  Statute,  1834,  567;  pro- 
mulgates the  Constitution  of 
1837,  568;  driven  into  exile,  568 


INDEX 


783 


Church  of  England,  position  of,  in 
England  (1815),  415;  abuses 
within,  416;  religious  disabilities 
of  Dissenters  from,  434;  posi- 
tion of,  in  Ireland,  468;  schools 
of,  477;  tests  of,  in  universities 
(England)  abolished,  483;  vol- 
untary schools  connected  with, 
513-514.     See   Irish   Church 

Churchill,  Lord  Randolph,  and  the 
Second  Home  Rule  Bill,  509 

Cisleithania,   395.     See    Austria 

Civil  Service  reform  in  England, 
489;  of  India,  523 

Civil  War  (United  States),  Eng- 
land and,  461,  486 

Clare,  County  of,  O'Connell  elect- 
ed  to   Parliament    from,   427 

Clarendon,  Lord,  on  the  Italian 
question,  220;  in  the  Gladstone 
ministry  of  1868,  465 

Clausewitz,  on  German  unity,  34 

Clemenceau,  leader  of  the  Radi- 
cals, 354 

Clericalism,  349 

Clotilde,  Princess,  betrothed  to 
Prince  Jerome  Napoleon,  223 

Coalition,  The  Great,  1,  592; 
treaties  of,  2 

Cobbett,  William,  and  "The  Week- 
ly Political  Register,"  419; 
driven   into   exile,   421 

Cobden,  Richard,  and  the  Anti- 
Corn-Law  League,  452 

Coburg,  Leopold  of,  elected  King 
of  Belgium,  104 

Cochin-China,  acquired  by  France 
(1858-1867),  373 

Collectivism,  Growth  of,  458.  See 
Socialism 

Colonial  Conferences  (British), 
1887,  1897,  1902,  1907,  548 

Colonies,  of  Belgium,  Congo  Free 
State  (1908),  557;  of  Denmark, 
in  Africa  (1815),  551;  (1909), 
594-595;  of  France  (1815),  371, 
551 ;  acquisitions  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  353-354,  371-375, 
554;  in  Asia,  681;  of  Germany, 
in  Africa,  319,  554;  of  Great 
Britain  (1815),  3,  9,  519,  551; 
slavery  abolished  in  (183 J/),  440; 
the  Disraeli  Ministry  and,  487; 
India,  519-523;  British  North 
America,  523-530;  Australia,  530- 
534;  New  Zealand,  534-536; 
British  South  Africa,  536-545; 
other    African   possessions,   552- 


Colonies,   continued 

554,  562;  Egypt,  554,  561;  in 
Asia,  681;  of  Holland  (1815), 
551;  (1909)  581;  of  Italy,  382- 
383,  554;  of  Portugal  (1815), 
551;  acquisitions  in  Africa 
(1884-1890),  554;  possessions  of, 
578;  of  Spain  (1815),  551; 
loses  American  (1898),  565,  574; 
possessions  of  (1898),  574 

Combes,  Prime  Minister  (France), 
attitude   toward   clericalism,   366 

Commonwealth  of  Australia.  See 
Australia 

Commonwealth  of  Australia  Con- 
stitution Act,  The   (1900),  533 

Commune  of  Paris,  The  (1871) 
conditions  in  Paris  prior  to,  330- 
333;  government  of,  333;  and 
the  National  Assembly,  334-335; 
cost  of  insurrection  to  France, 
337 

Concert  of  Powers,  at  Congress  of 
Vienna,  16;  signs  Quadruple  Al- 
liance, 17;  Turkey  admitted  to, 
616 

Concordat  of  1801,  367;  abrogated 
(1905),  368 

Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  a  Na- 
poleonic creation,  29 

Congo  Free  State,  founded  by  Leo- 
pold II  of  Belgium,  554;  rela- 
tion of,  to  Leopold  II,  555-557; 
conditions  in,  1905,  557;  declared 
a  colony  by  Belgium,  1908,  557; 

Congo,  International  Association 
of  the,  555 

Congo  River,  552;  Stanley's  ex- 
plorations   of,   553 

Congress  of  Berlin  (1878),  625- 
627;  and  the  Greek  frontier,  635 ; 
breaches  of  the  Treaty  of  Ber- 
lin, 629,  640,  644 

Congress  of  Paris  (1856),  212,  220, 
615-616 

Congress  of  Vienna  (September, 
ISi^-June,  1815)  Membership  of, 
3-5;  demands  of  Russia  and 
Prussia  at,  6-7;  Secret  Treaty 
of  Defensive  Triple  Alliance  con- 
cluded at,  7;  division  of  the 
spoils  by,  7-10;  criticism  of,  10; 
and  the  German  Confederation, 
29,  33,  35,  38;  Final  Act  of,  4, 
12;  and  Italy,  52,  230;  and  the 
Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands, 
101;  and  Belgium,  105;  and  Po- 
land, 106;  and  the  Pact  of  1815 


784 


INDEX 


Congress   of   Vienna,    continued 
(Switzerland),  584;  and  Greece, 
605;    Alexander    I    at,    647,    649; 
compared  with  the  Hague  Peace 
Conference,  736 

Congresses,  Tlie  (see  also  Congress 
of  Vienna),  Congress  of  Aix- 
la-Chapelle  (ISIS),  59,  649; 
Congress  of  Troppau  (1820), 
59;  Congress  of  Laibach  (1821), 
60;  Congress  of  Verona  (1822), 
62-63 

Constantine,  brother  of  Alexander 
I  of  Russia,  driven  from  War- 
saw, 108;  renounces  crown,  650 

Constantinople,  131,  557;  in  War 
of  Greek  Independence,  606; 
events  in  (1876),  620;  Russians 
march  toward,  611,624;  counter- 
revolution of  April,  1909,  in,  G'i2 

Constitution,  of  1791  (French), 
46,  576;  of  1S12  (Spanish),  45- 
46,  abolished,  47;  of  1S15 
(Switzerland),  584;  of  1837 
(Spanish),  568;  of  ISJfS  (Hol- 
land), 580;  of  18^8  (Switzer- 
land), 586;  of  1850  (Prussia), 
185-186;  of  1866  (Norway  and 
Sweden),  597;  of  1875  (France), 
345,  revision  of  (ISS-'t),  353; 
of  1876   (Spanish),  573 

Constitutional  Charter,  ISIJ^ 
(France),  67-70;  change  in,  82; 
Charles  X's  interpretation  of, 
93;  revised,  116 

Constitutional  Statute  (1848), 
Piedmont,  Charles  Albert  grants, 
185 

Convention    of    Bloemfontein,    538 

Corfe   Castle,  413 

Cork,  College   at,  484,   516 

Corn  Laws  (England),  449;  of 
1815  and  1828,  451;  repeal  of, 
1846,   454,    469 

Cornwall,  County  of,  representa- 
tion in  House  of  Commons,  1815, 
411 

Corporation  Act,  Repeal  of,  1828, 
425 

Cortes  (Portuguese),  576 

Cortes  (Spanish),  Position  of,  un- 
der the  Constitution  of  1812,  46; 
retire  to  Cadiz  on  the  invasion 
of  the  French  (1823),  63;  and 
the  Constitution  of  1837,  568; 
promulgate  the  Constitution  of 
1869,  569-570;  proclaim  the  Re- 
public (1873),  571 


Council  of  the  Empire,  The  (Rus- 
sia), constituted  by  the  Tsar, 
713 

County  Councils  Act  of  1888,  506 

Courland,  645 

Cousin,   86 

Couza,  Colonel  Alexander,  elected 
Prince  by  Moldavia  and  Wal- 
lachia  (1859),  618;  abdication 
of,   619 

Cowper-Temple  Amendment  to 
Forster  Education  Act  of  1870, 
480 

Cracow,  erected  into  a  free  city, 
8;  Republic  of,  106 

Crete,  Island  of,  612;  disposition 
of  1897,  635  and  note;  Oct.  7, 
1908,  declares  for  union  with 
Greece,  639 

Crimea,  War  in,  611-617;  reasons 
for  Piedmont's  participation  in, 
219;  England  and,  458;  inva- 
sion of  the,  614;  siege  of  Sebas- 
topol,  614;  battles  of  the  Alma, 
Balaklava,  and  Inkermann,  614; 
Treaty  of  Paris  (1856),  615;  re- 
sults of  the  war,  616;  Russia  in, 
654 

Crispi,  Francesco,  Prime  Minister, 
1887-1891,  1893-1896,  colonial 
policy,  382;  policy  of  repression, 
383 

Croatia,  Kingdom  of,  24;  a  certain 
measure  of  autonomy  in,  155; 
JeUachich  appointed  governor 
of,  177;  severed  from  Hungary, 
388;  position  in  the  Empire 
(1861),  390;  a  province  of 
Hungary,  396 

Croker,  on  Second  Reform  Bill, 
435 

Cromarty,  412 

Cromer,  Lord,  and  Egvpt,  560-561 

Crompton,    407,    722 

Cuba,  Spanish  possession,  565;  in- 
surrections in,  1868-1878,  1895, 
572,  574;  Spanish- American  War 
in   (1898),  574;  Spain  loses,  574 

Cumberland,  Duke  of,  accession 
of,    to   throne    of   Hanover,   446 

Cunard,  Samuel,  founder  of  first 
transatlantic  steamship  line.  724 

Curasao,  581 

Curia  Romana,  379 

Curtius,   246 

Cushing,  Caleb,  sent  by  the  United 
States  to  make  a  commercial 
treaty  with   China,  1844,  686 


INDEX 


785 


Custozza,  battle  of  flSJ/S)  between 
Aiistrians  and  Sardinians,  176, 
181,  215;  second  battle  of, 
(1866)  between  Austrians  and 
Italians,  265 

Cyprus,  639,  643 

Czechs,  in  Bohemia,  153,  172,  175; 
demands  of  (1868),  397;  con- 
cessions to,  under  the  TaafFe 
ministry,  400 ;  division  among,  401 

Dahomey,    French   possession,   374 

Daimios,  The,  of  Japan,  689;  and 
the  policy  of  isolation,  690-691, 
692;  relinquish  their  feudal 
rights,  693 

Danube,  navigation  of,  declared 
free  by  Treaty  of  Paris  (1856), 
615 

Danubian  Principalities,  Moldavia 
and  Wallachia,  become  practi- 
cally independent,  611;  Russian 
influence  in,  611;  Russian 
troops  enter,  1853,  612;  Russian 
evacuation  of,  1854,  614;  de- 
clared inider  the  suzerainty  of 
the  Porte  by  the  Treaty  ot 
Paris  (1856),  615;  the  Rou- 
manians in,  and  the  Crimean 
War,  617;  elect  Colonel  Alexan- 
der Couza  as  their  prince,  618; 
union  of  the  Principalities, 
618.     See  Roumania 

Dawson,  estimate  of  Bismarck's 
policy  of  State  Socialism,  317 

Days  of  March,  Hungary  (18If8), 
170,  174 

Days  of  June,  France  (18^8),  194, 
198 

D'Azeglio,  1708-1866,  Author  of 
" Recent  Events  in  Romagna" 
165;  and  the  question  of  Rome 
and  the  Kingdom  of  Italy,  238; 
on  Italian  unity,  376 

Deak,  Francis,  158;  leader  of  the 
moderate  liberals  in  Hungary 
(1861),  391 

Decazes,  Minister  of  Louis  XVIII, 
75;  and  the  Electoral  Law,  77; 
forced  to  resign,  80 

Delarey,  in  the  South  African 
War',  543 

Delhi,  521. 

Demerara,  retained  by  England 
(1815),  9. 

Denmark,  King  of,  at  Congress  of 
Vienna,  4;  loses  Norway,  11, 
592;   King  of,  a  member  of  the 


Denmark,  coniintied 

German  Confederation,  31 ;  in- 
fluence of  events  in  Italy  (1859) 
upon,  246;  war  with  Prussia  and 
Austria  and  Treaty  of  Vienna, 
(186-'i)  256-259,  593;  possessions 
of,  in  Africa  (1815),  551;  gov- 
ernment of,  592-593;  Frederick 
VII  grants  constitutions  to, 
593;  revision  of  the  Constitution 
of  18Ji9  (1866),  594;  growth  of 
radicalism  in,  594;  colonies  of, 
594-595;  Prince  Charles  of,  be- 
comes Haakon  VII  of  Norway 
(1905),  600 

Depretis,  colonial  policy  of,  382 

Derby,  Lord,  attitude  of  the 
Derby-Disraeli  ministry  toward 
the  Jews,  458;  becomes  Prime 
Minister,  462;  on  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1861,  464 

Deshima,  Peninsula  of,  690 

Devil's  Island,  Dreyfus  deported 
to,  359;  Dreyfus  brought  from, 
362 

Devonshire,  Duke  of.  See  Harting- 
ton,  Lord 

Dicey,  A.  V.,  on  the  Factory  and 
Workshop  Act  of  1901,  457 

Diet  of  Frankfort,  29;  forced  vote 
on  Carlsbad  Decrees,  41 ;  new 
measures  of  repression  (1832), 
112;  and  the  national  movement 
in  Germany,  174;  revived  (1851), 
185,  240;  Bismarck,  Prussian 
delegate  to  (1851),  253;  King  of 
Denmark  as  Duke  of  Holstein 
represented  in,  257;  protests 
against  the  incorporation  of 
Schleswig  with  Denmark,  257; 
Austria  brings  Schleswig-Hol- 
stein  question  before  the,  263; 
Austria  moves  in  the,  that  the 
federal  forces  be  sent  against 
Prussia,  263;  ceases  to  exist,  268 

Disraeli,  461 ;  becomes  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  1866, 
462;  Reform  Bill  of  1867  car- 
ried by,  463;  on  the  Irish  I^and 
Act  of  1810,  476;  attitude  to- 
ward Irish  University  Bill  of 
1813,  485;  ministry  of,  ^87^- 
1880,  486-490;  and  imperialism, 
487;  and  the  purchase  of 
the  Suez  Canal  shares,  488; 
proposes  title  of  Empress  of 
India  for  the  Queen,  489;  for- 
eign   policy    of,    489;     becomes 


786 


INDEX 


Disraeli,  continued 

Lord  Beaconsfield  (1816),  489; 
fall  of  ministry  of,  490,  539; 
death  of  (1881),  497;  and  tiie 
annexation  of  the  Transvaal  to 
Great  Britain,  538;  and  the  Bul- 
garian atrocities,  622;  represents 
England  at  the  Congress  of 
Berlin   (1878),  625 

Divorce,  in  France,  abolished  in 
1814,  restored  in  1884,  352 

Dobrudscha,  ceded  to  Roumania 
in   place   of   Bessarabia,   625-626 

Dollinger,  on  the  Dogma  of  Papal 
Infallibilitj^    307 

Dominion  of  Canada.     See  Canada 

Dominion  of  New  Zealand.  See 
New   Zealand 

Dostoievski,   652 

Double  Vote,  in  France,  by  Elec- 
toral Law  of  1820,  81 ;  rescinded 
(1831),   117 

Draga,  Queen,  wife  of  Alexander 
I  of  Servia,  murder  of,  633 

Dresden,  retained  by  King  of 
Saxony,  8;  Prussian  troops  oc- 
cupy, 264 

Dreyfus  Case,  358-364;  Dreyfus 
(Alfred)  condemned  for  trea- 
son (1895),  359;  attempts  in 
Dreyfus'  favor,  360;  Zola  tries 
to  reopen  the,  360;  Court  of 
Cassation  orders  a  retrial  of, 
1899,  362;  Dreyfus  pardoned  by 
President  Loubet,  362;  vindicat- 
ed, 363;  the  clergy  in,  368 

Droysen,  246 

Dual  Alliance  (1891),  Russia  and 
France,  357 

Dual  Control  (1879-1883),  Eng- 
land and  France  in  Egypt,  559, 
561 

Dual  Monarchy  (Austria-Him- 
gary),  393-396 

Dublin,  Irish  Parliament  at,  abol- 
ished (1800),  468;  Universities 
at,  484;  formation  of  Home 
Rule  League  at,  497;  Thomas 
Burke  assassinated  at,  499;  L^ni- 
versity  at  (1908),  for  Catholics, 
516 

Duchies,  War  of  the.  See 
Schleswig-Holstein 

Duma,  Character  of  the,  711,  712; 
elections  to,  713;  Nicholas  II 
opens  the.  May  10,  1906,  713;  de- 
mands and  impotence  of,  714; 
dissolved  by  the  Tsar,  July  22, 


Duma,  continued 

1906,  715;  Viborg  Manifesto  by 
members  of  the,  715;  The  Sec- 
ond, opened  by  the  Tsar,  March 
5,  1907,  715,  dissolved,  June  16, 

1907,  716;  The  Third,  November 
14,  1907,  716 

Dunwich,    413 

Durham,  Lord,  in  the  Grey  Min- 
istry, 430;  on  condition  of  the 
colonies  in  Canada,  525;  mis- 
sion of,  525;  report  of,  525- 
527,  528 

Dutch  Guiana,  581 

East   India  Company,  519,   522 

East  Indies,  519;  Dutch  colonies 
in,  581 

East   Prussia,    326 

Eastern  Question,  Thiers  and, 
131;  Treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi 
(1833),  132;  London  Confer- 
ence (1840)  and,  132;  Austria- 
Hungary  and,  405;  importance 
of,  602;  Nicholas  I  and,  611- 
612;  Moldavia-Wallachia  and, 
611,  617;  reopening  of,  1875, 
489,  620;  England  and,  625;  Con- 
gress of  Berlin  (1878)  and,  625- 
627;  Young  Turks  and,  636-644. 
See  also  Turkey  and  Chapter 
XXVIII,   601-644,  passim 

Edict  of  Emancipation  (Russia), 
1861,  657 

Edinburgh,  98 

Edinburgh  Reviev)  (1819),  Fran- 
cis Jeffrey  on  the  steam  engine, 
408 

Education,  Creation  of  a  national 
system  of,  in  France,  352;  com- 
pulsory, in  Italy  by  Education 
Laws,  1877  and  1904,  381; 
secular,  established  in  Austria, 
397;  in  England  by  Forster 
Education  Act  of  iS70,  478- 
481 ;  attendance  made  compul- 
sorj'  in  England  (1880),  481; 
made  free  in  England  (1891), 
481;  Education  Act  of  1902, 
513-514;  in  Portugal,  578;  in 
Belgium,  582-583;  in  Denmark, 
594;  in  Greece,  635;  in  Russia, 
660,  661;  in  Japan,  693;  in 
China,  704 

Edward  VII,  1901 — ,  accession  of, 
513 

Egj-pt,  war  with  Turkey,  131; 
Khedive     of,     sells     shares     of 


INDEX 


787 


Egypt,  contitmed 
Suez  Canal  to  England,  488; 
early  history  of,  550;  in  1S15, 
551 ;  English  occupation  of, 
1S82,  554;  557-563;  relation  to 
Turkey,  557;  Mehemet  Ali  in, 
557;  intervention  of  England 
and  France  in,  559;  revolt  of 
Arabi  Pasha,  559;  English  ex- 
pedition crushes  the  revolt,  559; 
England  assumes  the  position  of 
adviser  in,  560;  English  occupa- 
tion of,  561;  loss  of  tiie  Soudan, 
561 ;  recovery  of  the  Soudan, 
562;  part  of  the  Ottoman  Em- 
pire (1815),  601 ;  condition  in 
1815,  602,  643 

Eidsvold,  Constitution  of,  181It, 
595,  598 

Elba,   122 

Electricity,  and  the  industrial  de- 
velopment of  Italy,  385-386;  the 
telegraph,  the  telephone,  726 

Elgin,  Lord,  Governor  of  Canada, 
introduces  principle  of  minis- 
terial  responsibility,  527 

Ely,  attitude  of  government  to- 
ward rioters  in,  420 

Emancipation  of  the  serfs,  in  Rus- 
sia  (1861),  657 

Empress-Dowager  of  China,  698; 
change  of  policy  of  the,  704 

Ems,  291 ;  despatch,  292 

Ena,  Princess,  of  Battenberg, 
marries  King  Alfonso  XIII  of 
Spain    (1906),   575 

England,  retains  Malta  (1815), 
3;  acquisitions  of  (1815),  9; 
signs  Quadruple  Alliance 
(1815),  17;  King  of,  a  member 
of  the  German  Confederation 
for  Hanover,  31 ;  at  Congress 
of  Troppau  (1820),  59;  opposes 
policy  of  armed  intervention  in 
Spain,  63;  Canning  restricts 
Holy  AUiance  to  the  Continent 
of  Europe,  64-65;  influence  of 
July  Revolution  (1830)  in,  100; 
favors  election  of  Leopold  of 
Coburg  as  King  of  Belgium, 
104;  recognizes  Kingdom  of 
Belgium  at  conference  of  the 
Powers  in  London  (1830-1831), 
105;  aids  Turkey  against  Rus- 
sia, 132;  London  Conference 
(1840),  132;  with  France  and 
Piedmont  wages  war  against 
Russia  in  the  Crimea,  212,  219; 


England,  contirmed 
at  Congress  of  Paris  (1856), 
220;  participates  in  affairs  in 
Italy,  229;  attitude  toward  the 
cession  of  Savoy  and  Nice  to 
France,  231,  274;  Napoleon 
Ill's  treaty  of  commerce  with 
(1860),  274;  intervenes  with 
France  and  Spain  in  Mexico, 
277;  neutrality  of,  in  Franco- 
German  war,  294;  Free  Trade 
in,  310-312,  450-455;  fleet  of, 
bombards  Algiers,  372;  to  the 
Reform  Bill  of  1832,  406-438; 
in  1815,  406;  industrial  revolu- 
tion in,  406-408;  renown  of  Par- 
liament, 409;  a  land  of  the  old 
regime,  409;  commanding  posi- 
tion of  the  nobility  in,  410; 
House  of  Commons  (1815),  410- 
414;  the  Church  of,  415-416; 
works  of  Adam  Smith  and 
Jeremy  Bentham  on  conditions 
in,  417;  efi"ect  of  the  French 
Revolution  upon,  417;  economic 
distress  in,  after  1815,  418; 
Corn  Law  of  1815,  418;  demand 
for  reform,  419;  William  Cobbett 
and  parliamentary  reform,  419- 
420;  popular  disturbances 
(1816),  420;  Spa  Fields,  420; 
suspension  of  Habeas  Corpus 
(1817),  421;  massacre  of  Peter- 
loo  (1819),  421;  Parliament 
passes  the  Gag  Laws,  422;  death 
of  George  III  (1820),  and  ac- 
cesion  of  George  IV  (1820- 
1830),  422;  era  of  reform  after 
1820,  422;  defiance  of  the  Holy 
Alliance,  422;  economic  reforms 
in,  423;  Penal  Code,  reformed 
by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  424;  reli- 
gious inequality,  424;  repeal  of 
the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts 
(1828),  425;  O'Connell  founds 
the  Catholic  Association  in  Ire- 
land, 427;  O'Connell  elected 
to  Parliament,  427;  Catholic 
Emancipation  Act  (1829),  428; 
Tory  opposition  to  the  reform 
of  Parliament,  428;  death  of 
George  IV  and  accession  of  Wil- 
liam IV,  428;  influence  of  the 
French  Revolution  of  1830, 
429;  fall  of  the  Tory  ministry, 
430;  First  Reform  Bill,  430; 
speeches  for  and  against,  431- 
435;    ministry    defeated,   Parlia- 


788 


INDEX 


England,  continued 
ment  dissolved,  435;  Second  Re- 
form Bill  defeated  by  the 
House  of  Lords,  435;  Third 
Reform  Bill,  430';  Grey  Min- 
istry resigns,  436;  William  IV 
attempts  to  get  a  ministry, 
fails  and  recalls  Grey,  436;  the 
Bill  passed,  June  4,  1S32,  437; 
redistribution  of  seats,  437;  the 
franchise,  437;  between  two 
Great  Reforms  (1832-1867),  439- 
464;  era  of  Whig  government, 
439;  abolition  of  slavery  in  the 
colonies,  ISS-'i,  440;  child  labor 
agitation,  440-441;  Factory  Act, 
1833,  442;  evils  in  local  govern- 
ment, 442;  Municipal  Corpora- 
tions Act,  1835,  444;  death  of 
William  IV  and  accession  of 
Queen  Victoria,  445;  the  Queen's 
political  education  and  mar- 
riage, 445;  loss  of  Hanover,  446; 
Chartist  Movement,  446-450; 
The  People's  Charter  (1838), 
447;  Lovett  and  O'Connor,  447- 
448;  Petition  of  1848,  449;  sig- 
nificance of  the  movement,  449; 
Free  Trade  and  Anti-Corn-Law 
Agitation,  450-455 ;  Anti-Corn- 
Law  League  (1839)  Cobden, 
Bright  and  Villiers,  452;  argu- 
ments for  Free  Trade,  452;  Irish 
Famine,  453;  repeal  of  the  Corn 
Laws,  18^6,  454;  remaining  pro- 
tective duties  gradually  removed, 
454;  Navigation  Laws  abol- 
ished (18-',9),  454;  labor  legis- 
lation, 1840-1850,  455-458;  regu- 
lation of  labor  in  mines,  455; 
Factory  Laws  of  IS-U,  1847, 
1850,  Act  of  1878,  456;  Morley 
on  the  labor  code,  456;  Factory 
and  Workshop  Act  of  1901, 
457;  growth  of  trades-unions, 
457;  growth  of  collectivism,  458; 
Jews  admitted  to  House  of  Com- 
mons, 1858,  458;  abolition  of 
property  qualification  for  mem- 
bers of  Parliament,  458;  Glad- 
stone, Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer and  his  policy,  459; 
Postal  Savings  Banks,  459;  in- 
dustrial and  scientific  progress, 
460;  demand  for  a  wider  suf- 
frage, 461;  efl'ect  of  the  Civil 
War  in  the  United  States  on, 
461;  Gladstone  introduces  a  re- 


England,    continued 

form  bill,  1866,  461;  Derby  and 
Disraeli  form  a  ministry,  462; 
Reform  Bill  of  ^867  carried  by 
Disraeli,  463;  provisions  of  the 
Reform  Bill  of  1867,  463;  re- 
distribution of  seats,  464;  the 
Liberals  under  Gladstone  come 
into  power,  464;  under  Glad- 
stone and  Disraeli,  465-496;  the 
Great  Ministry,  465;  conditions 
in  Ireland  (1815),  467-469; 
Disestablishment  of  the  Irish 
Church,  1869,  472;  Irish  Land 
Act  of  1870,  475-477;  Church 
schools,  477;  Forster  Education 
Act  of  1870,  478-481;  condition 
of  education  prior  to  1870,  478; 
inadequacy  of  the  system,  473; 
the  Act  and  its  provisions, 
478-480;  attendance  made  com- 
pulsorv  (1880),  481;  attendance 
made  "free  (1891),  481;  Educa- 
tion Act  of  1902,  481,  513-514; 
Army  reform  (1871),  481-482; 
introduction  of  short  service, 
481 ;  abolition  of  the  purchase 
system,  482;  Civil  Service  re- 
form (1870),  482;  Ballot  Law 
of  1872,  483-484;  Gladstone's 
Irish  University  Bill  of  1873  de- 
feated, 485;  Gladstone  resigns 
but  returns  to  office,  485;  the 
Alabama  award,  486,  591 ;  Con- 
servatives under  Disraeli  come 
into  office  by  elections  of  1874, 
486;  the  Disraeli  Ministry,  1874- 
1880,  486-490;  importance  of  the 
colonies  emphasized,  487;  pur- 
chase of  the  Suez  Canal  shares 
(1875),  488,  558;  Queen  pro- 
claimed Empress  of  India,  489, 
522;  reopening  of  the  Eastern 
Question  (1876),  489;  Second 
Gladstone  Ministry,  1880-1885, 
490-496;  failure  of  the  Irish 
Land  Act  of  1870,  490;  Irish 
Land  Act  of  1881,  the  Three  F's, 
491;  Reform  Bill  of  1884,  492 
Redistribution  Act  of  1885,  493 
Single  Member  districts,  494 
qualifications  for  voting,  495 
since  1886,  497-517;  Irish  Home 
Rule  Movement,  498;  Third 
Gladstone  Ministry,  1886,  499; 
introduction  of  the  Home  Rule 
Bill,  500;  Irish  Land  Purchase 
Bill,  501;  opposition  to  the  bills. 


INDEX 


789 


England,  continued 
501-504;  disruption  of  the  Lib- 
eral Party,  501;  Home  Rule 
Bill  defeated,  504;  fall  of 
Gladstone,  504;  Second  Salis- 
bury Ministry,  1886-1892,  505- 
507;  policy  of  coercion  for  Ire- 
land, 505;  Land  Purchase  Act  of 
1891,  505-50G;  County  Councils 
Act  of  1888,  506;  social  legis- 
lation, 507;  increase  of  the 
Navy,  507;  Fourth  Gladstone 
Ministry  (1892-1894),  507-510; 
second  Home  Rule  Bill  (1893), 
507-509;  Parish  Councils  Bill  of 
189Jf,  509;  Gladstone  resigns, 
510;  Rosebery  Ministry,  510-511; 
Third  Salisbury  Ministry,  511- 
515;  War  in  South  Africa,  1899- 
1902,  513;  Irish  Land  Purchase 
Act  of  1896,  512;  Irish  Local 
Government  Act  (1898),  512; 
Education  Act  of  1902,  513; 
abolition  of  tiie  school  boards, 
514;  decline  of  illiteracy,  514; 
the  Liberal  Party  in  power, 
1905—,  515;  Old  Age  Pensions 
Law  (1908),  515;  Irish  Univer- 
sity or  Birrell  Act  (1908),  516; 
colonial  possessions  prior  to 
1815,  519;  India,  519-523;  an- 
nexation of  Burma  and  Balu- 
chistan and  protectorate  of 
Afghanistan,  523;  British  North 
America,  523-530;  the  Durham 
Mission,  525;  Lord  Durham's 
Report,  525-537;  the  Oregon  dis- 
pute, 529;  relation  of  Canada 
to,  529;  and  Australia,  530-534; 
and  New  Zealand,  534-536;  and 
British  South  Africa,  536-545; 
acquires  Cape  Colony,  536;  fric- 
tion with  tlie  Boers,  537;  the 
Great  Trek  (1836),  537;  sends 
troops  into  Natal  (18.!i2),  538; 
proclaims  Natal  a  colony  (18^3), 
538;  Orange  Free  State  declared 
a  part  of  the  British  Empire 
(1848),  538;  Transvaal  annexed 
to  the  British  Empire  (1877), 
538;  Majuba  Hill,  539;  Pretoria 
Convention,  1881,  540;  London 
Convention,  1884,  540;  Jameson 
Raid,  1895,  541;  Sir  Alfred 
Milner's  Reports,  1899,  542; 
South  African  War,  1899-1902, 
543-544;  annexation  of  the 
Transvaal  and  the  Orange  Free 


England,  continued 
State  to  the  British  Empire, 
1902,  544;  and  Imperial  Federa- 
tion, 545-549;  possessions  in 
Africa,  1815,  551;  explorations 
in  Africa,  552-553;  occupies 
Egypt,  1882,  554;  acquisitions  in 
Africa,  1884-1890,  554;  at  the 
Conference  of  the  Powers,  1876, 
554;  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin, 
1884-1885,  555;  demands  re- 
forms in  tlie  Congo,  557;  inter- 
venes in  Egypt,  559;  crushes  the 
revolt  of  Arabi  Pasha,  1882, 
559;  assumes  the  position  of 
"adviser,"  560;  "occupation"  of 
Egypt,  561;  recovers  Soudan, 
1898,  562;  Lord  Beresford 
in  Portugal,  1807,  575;  inter- 
venes in  the  Greek  War  of  Inde- 
pendence, 608;  and  the  Treaty  of 
London,  1827,  609;  battle  of 
Navarino,  1827,  610;  guarantees 
independence  of  Greece,  611; 
Nicholas  I  of  Russia  and,  611; 
in  the  Coalition  against  Russia, 
613;  invasion  of  the  Crimea  and 
siege  of  Sebastopol,  614;  Treaty 
of  Paris,  1856,  615;  and  the  Ber- 
lin Memorandum,  1876,  620;  de- 
mands revision  of  the  Treaty  of 
San  Stefano,  625;  at  Congress 
of  Berlin,  1878,  625-636;  occu- 
pies Cyprus,  636 ;  cedes  the  Ionian 
Islands  to  Greece,  1864,  634;  in- 
duces the  Sultan  to  cede  Thes- 
saly  to  Greece,  1881,  634;  atti- 
tude toward  the  breaches  of  the 
Berlin  Treaty  of  1878,  629,  640; 
in  Asia,  681 ;  and  the  Opium 
War,  1840-1842,  685;  gains  by 
Treaty  of  Nanking  (1842),  685; 
joined  by  France  in  second  war 
against  China,  686;  Treaty  of 
Tientsin  (1858),  686,  confirmed, 
687;  bombards  Kagoshima,  691; 
acquires  a  port  in  Cliina  by 
lease,  697;  helps  to  rescue  the 
legations  in  Peking,  698;  diplo- 
matic relations  of,  with  Russia 
concerning  Manchuria,  700; 
Anglo-Japanese  Treaty  of  1902, 
700 

Epirus,    636 

Eritrea,   Italian   colony,  382 

Esterhazy,   Major,   and   the  Drey- 
fus Case,  359-363 

Esthonia,  645 


790 


INDEX 


Eton  College,  Gladstone  at,  465; 
477 

Eugenie,  Empress,  marries  Na- 
poleon III,  210;  urges  war 
against  Prussia,  293;  flees  from 
Paris  after  the  surrender  of  Na- 
poleon III  at  Sedan,  297;  306 

Europe,  Reconstruction  of,  1-22; 
Central,  between  two  Revolu- 
tions, 145-168;  Central,  in  Re- 
volt,  169-186 

"Expansion  of  England,"  by 
Seeley,  on  the  government  of  In- 
dia, 522 

Factory  Acts  (England),  Act  of 
1833,  442;  Acts  of  18U,  1847, 
1850,  456;  Act  of  1S78,  456; 
Act  of  1889,  506-507;  Factory 
and  Workshop  Act  of  1901,  457 

Factory  system,  Rise  of,  722.  See 
Industrial  Revolution 

Faidherbe,  and  the  annexation  of 
the  Senegal  Valley,  373 

Faillv,  General  de,  295 

Falk"  Laws  (Prussia,  1873,  1874, 
1875),  308 

Far  East,  The,  681-705 

Far  Eastern  Question,  680,  703. 
See  Chapter  XXX,  681-705 

Faroe  Islands,  594 

Faure,  Felix,  President  of  the 
French  Republic  (1895-1899), 
358;  death  of,  361 

Favre,  Jules,  and  the  proclamation 
of  the  French  Republic,  297- 
298 

February  Revolution  (1848)  in 
France,  Influence  of,  in  Europe, 
145 

Federal  Act  of  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  32,  35,  38 

Federation  (British  Imperial). 
See  Imperial 

Fenian   Movement,  470,  528 

Ferdinand  of  Saxe-Coburg,  Prince 
of  Bulgaria,  elected  Prince  of 
Bulgaria  (1887),  630;  election 
of,  recognized  by  the  Great 
Powers  (1896),  631;  proclaims 
complete  independence  of  Bul- 
garia, October  5,  1908,  and  as- 
sumes the  title  of  King,  631,  639 

Ferdinand  I,  Emperor  of  Austria, 
1835-1848,  27,  152;  dissolves 
Hungarian  parliament,  178; 
flees  to  Olmiitz,  178;  abdication 
of,  179 


Ferdinand  I,  King  of  Naples, 
treaty  of,  with  Austria,  53; 
character  of,  56;  at  Florence,  60 

Ferdinand  II,  King  of  Naples, 
proclaims  a  constitution,  167; 
181;  220 

Ferdinand  VII,  King  of  Spain, 
restoration  of  (1814),  46-50; 
character  of,  46;  abolishes  Con- 
stitution of  1812,  47;  persecutes 
Liberals,  47;  disintegration  of 
the  Spanish  Empire  under,  48- 
49,  565;  Revolution  of  1820,  49- 
50;  proclaims  Constitution  of 
1812,  50;  absolutism  of,  restored 
by  France,  63;  revenge  of,  after 
1823,  564;  promulgates  the  Prag- 
matic Sanction  of  1789  (1830), 
565;  death  of  (1833),  566 

Ferrara,  Pius  IX  protests  against 
Austrian  occupation  of,   166 

Ferry,  Jules,  and  the  proclamation 
of"  the  French  Republic,  297; 
351;  minister  of  public  instruc- 
tion, 353;  prime  minister,  1881, 
1883-1885,  his  colonial  policy, 
353;  overthrow  of,  355;  sends 
troops  into  Tunis  (1881),  374 

Fichte,  44 

Field,  Cyrus,  and  the  Atlantic 
Cable,  460 

Fielden,  and  the  child  labor  agita- 
tion, 442 

Fiesclii,  attempt  on  the  life  of 
Louis  Philippe,  125 

Fife,  412 

Figueras,   572 

Final  Act  of  Congress  of  Vienna, 
4,   12 

Finland,  retained  by  Russia  in 
1815,  8;  seized  by  Russia,  595, 
645;  Russification  of,  672; 
Nicholas  II  and,  678-680;  abro- 
gation of  the  constitution  of, 
679;  Russia  makes  concessions 
to,  713;  the  Viborg  Manifesto, 
715;  Nicholas  II  restores  the  lib- 
erties of  (1905),  717;  Parlia- 
ment of,  altered,  718;  conditions 
in  (1909),  718 

Flocon,    188 

Florence,  overthrow  of  Republic 
of,  182;  capital  of  Italy,  1865- 
1871,  378 

Florida,  64 

Foochow,  opened  to  British  trade 
by  Treaty  of  Nanking  (1842), 
685 


INDEX 


791 


Forbach,  Germans  defeat  the 
French  at,  296 

Forey,  General,  278 

Formosa,  China  cedes,  to  Japan 
(1S95),  696 

Forster,  William  Edward,  in  the 
Gladstone  Ministry,  1868,  465; 
Education  Act  of  1870,  478-481, 
513 

Fouch^,  27 

Fox,  433;  on  the  government  of 
colonies,  526 

France,  and  the  restoration  ot 
Louis  XVIII,  2;  boundaries  of, 
by  Treaty  of  Paris  flSUf),  3; 
Isle  of,  9;  burdens  imposed 
upon,  by  Second  Treaty  of 
Paris  (1815),  13;  attitude  of 
Allies  toward,  16-17;  at  Con- 
gress of  Troppau  (1820),  59;  at 
Congress  of  Verona  (1822), 
62;  reign  of  Louis  XVIII,  66- 
83;  during  the  Restoration,  66- 
99;  France  in  1815,  66;  the  Con- 
stitutional Charter,  67-70;  politi- 
cal parties  in  (1815),  72-73;  the 
White  Terror  in,  73;  execution 
of  Marshal  Ney,  74;  the  King 
and  the  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
74;  period  of  moderate  liberal- 
ism in  (1816-1820),  75;  the  al- 
lied troops  evacuate,  75;  reor- 
ganization of  the  army  in  (1818), 
76;  the  electoral  system  in,  77; 
the  Press  Law  of  1819, IS;  activ- 
ity of  the  Ultras  in,  78;  and  the 
election  of  Gr^goire,  79;  and  the 
murder  of  the  Duke  of  Berry, 
79;  the  Electoral  Law  of  1820 
in,  80;  censorship  restored  in,  81; 
invades  Spain  (1823),  63,  82; 
death  of  Louis  XVIII,  82;  reign 
of  Charles  X,  83-97;  policy  of 
Charles  X,  83-89;  fall  of  Vil- 
l^le  Ministry,  89;  ministries  of 
Martignac  and  Polignac,  89- 
91;  prorogation  of  Chambers  and 
General  Election,  91-92;  Ordi- 
nances of  July  (1830),  92;  July 
Revolution,  95;  abdication  of 
Charles  X,  97;  Louis  Philippe 
made  King,  98;  end  of  the 
Restoration,  98-99;  favors  elec- 
tion of  Leopold  of  Coburg  as 
King  of  Belgium,  104;  recog- 
nizes Kingdom  of  Belgium, 
105;  attitude  toward  insurrec- 
tion  in    the   Papal    States,    110; 


France,  contirmed 
seizes  Ancona,  111;  reign  of 
Louis  Philippe,  114-144;  his 
legal  title  to  the  throne,  115; 
the  constitution  of,  revised,  116; 
the  franchise  in,  lowered  (1831), 
117;  character  of  the  July  Mon- 
archy in,  117;  insecurity  of  the 
new  regime,  118;  the  progressive 
and  conservative  parties,  119; 
popular  unrest,  120;  Casimir- 
P^rier  Ministry  in,  120-122;  the 
Legitimists,  122;  Republican  in- 
surrection (1832),  123;  vigorous 
measures  of  the  government  in, 
124;  attempts  upon  the  life  of 
Louis  Philippe,  125;  the  Sep- 
tember Laws  (1835),  125;  Louis 
Philippe  and  the  Napoleonic 
legend,  127-129;  rivalry  of  Thiers 
and  Guizot,  130;  personal  gov- 
ernment of  Louis  Philippe,  131; 
Thiers  and  the  Eastern  Ques- 
tion, 131 ;  becomes  patron  of 
Mehemet  Ali,  132;  ignored  by 
London  Conference  (ISJ/O),  132; 
ministry  of  Thiers,  131-132; 
ministry  of  Guizot,  132-142;  de- 
mand for  electoral  and  parlia- 
mentary reform  in,  135;  rise 
of  radicalism  in,  136;  growth  of 
socialism  in,  138;  opposition  to 
the  policy  of  the  government, 
139-142;  the  "reform  banquets," 
140;  revolution  of  February 
(1848),  142,  187;  abdication  and 
flight  of  Louis  Philippe,  142; 
Second  Republic  proclaimed, 
143;  effect  of  Revolution  of  1848 
on  Europe,  145,  176;  intervenes 
in  Rome,  182;  siege  and  capture 
of  Rome,  182;  Second  Republic, 
187-206;  Provisional  Government, 
in,  188;  achievements  of  the 
Provisional  Government,  189;  the 
national  workshops,  192;  Na- 
tional Constituent  Assembly, 
193;  riot  of  May  15,  1848,  193; 
abolition  of  the  national  work- 
shops, 194;  the  June  Days 
(1848),  194;  military  dictator- 
ship of  Cavaignac,  194;  grow- 
ing opposition  to  the  Republic, 
195;  the  constitution,  196-198; 
rise  of  Louis  Napoleon,  198- 
199;  Louis  Napoleon  elected 
President,  200;  the  legislative  as- 
sembly,  201;   the  President   and 


792 


INDEX 


France,   continued 

Assembly  combine  to  crush  the 
Republicans,  202;  Law  of  1S50 
limiting  the  franchise,  202; 
Louis  Napoleon  desires  pro- 
longation of  his  Presidency,  203; 
Assembly  refuses  to  revise  the 
constitution  for  this  purpose, 
203;  Louis  Napoleon's  prepara- 
tions for  the  coup  d'etat,  203; 
Assembly  refuses  Louis  Na- 
poleon's demands  for  the  re- 
establishment  of  universal  suf- 
frage, 203;  coup  d'etat  of  De- 
cember 2,  1S51,  204;  the  "mas- 
sacre of  the  boulevards,"  205; 
the  plebiscite  intrusts  Louis  Na- 
poleon with  forming  a  constitu- 
tion, 205;  Louis  Napoleon  pro- 
claimed Emperor  Napoleon  III, 
(December  2,  1S52),  205;  the 
Second  Empire,  1852-1870,  206- 
214;  programme  of  Napoleon 
III,  207;  the  political  institutions 
of  the  Empire,  207-209 ;  the  press 
shackled  in,  209;  character  of  the 
government  of,  210;  economic  de- 
velopment of,  211;  general  pros- 
perity of,  212;  Congress  of  Paris 
(1856),  212,  220;  with  England 
and  Piedmont  wages  war  against 
Russia  in  the  Crimea,  212,  219; 
and  the  Italian  war  of  1859,  213, 
225;  defeats  Austrians  at  Ma- 
genta and  Solferino,  225;  con- 
cludes peace  with  Austria  at 
Villa  franca,  225;  annexes  Savoy 
and  Nice,  231 ;  transformation 
of  the  Second  Empire  in,  272- 
284;  effect  of  the  Italian  war 
upon,  272;  makes  secret  treaty 
of  commerce  with  England 
(1860),  274;  powers  of  Parlia- 
ment in,  increased,  275;  rise  of 
a  Republican  party  in,  276;  and 
the  Mexican  Expedition,  277- 
280;  concessions  to  liberalism  in, 
280;  right  of  interpellation 
granted  in,  281;  rise  of  the 
Third  Party  in,  282;  transforma- 
tion of  the  Empire  com- 
pleted, 283;  plebiscite  of  May 
(1870),  284;  and  the  Franco- 
German  War,  285-302;  indigna- 
tion of,  over  the  candidacy  of 
Prince  Leopold  for  the  Spanish 
throne,  290;  and  the  Ems  des- 
T)atch,   292;    declares   war   upon 


France,  continued 
Prussia  (1870),  293;  isolation 
of,  294;  condition  of  the  army, 
295;  numerical  inferiority  of  the 
French,  295;  the  Germans  in- 
vade, 296;  defeated  at  Worth, 
Forbach,  Spicheren,  Borny, 
Mars-la-Tours  and  Gravelotte, 
296;  battle  of  Sedan  and  the  sur- 
render of  Napoleon,  297;  fall 
of  the  Empire,  297;  proclama- 
tion of  the  Republic,  297;  and 
the  Government  of  National  De- 
fense, 298;  siege  of  Paris,  298- 
299;  fall  of  Metz,  298;  fall  of 
Strassburg,  299;  capitulation  of 
Paris  and  armistice,  299;  elec- 
tion of  a  National  Assembly  in, 
299;  National  Assembly  (1871- 
1876)  meets  at  Bordeaux,  300; 
Thiers  as  "Chief  of  the  Execu- 
tive Power "  arranges  terms  of 
peace  with  Bismarck,  300;  Trea- 
ties of  Versailles  and  Frankfort 
with  Germany,  300;  isolation  of, 
by  Bismarck,  320;  seizes  Tunis 
(1881),  321;  under  the  Third 
Republic,  329-375;  the  National 
Assembly,  February,  1871,  meets 
at  Bordeaux,  300,  329;  the  Com- 
mune, 330-336;  Paris  and  the 
Assembly  mutually  suspicious, 
330;  Versailles  declared  the 
capital,  330;  distress  of  the 
working  classes  in  Paris,  331; 
revolutionary  elements  in  Paris, 
331;  idea  of  the  Commune,  332; 
action  of  the  National  Guard, 
332;  war  between  the  Commune 
and  the  Versailles  Government, 
333;  Government  of  the  Com- 
mune, 333;  the  Commune  and 
the  National  Assembly  clash, 
334;  Government  of  Thiers,  336- 
342;  Rivet  Law  passed  by  the 
National  Assembly,  337;  Thiers 
becomes  President  of  the  Re- 
public, 337;  liberation  of  the 
territory  of,  338;  reform  in  local 
government  of,  339 ;  army  reform 
in,  339;  question  of  the  perma- 
nent form  of  government  in, 
340;  the  monarchist  parties  in, 
341 ;  resignation  of  Thiers,  341 ; 
MacMahon  elected  President, 
342;  the  framing  of  the  consti- 
tution, 342-351;  establishment  of 
the  Septennate,  343;  the  Assem- 


INDEX 


793 


France,   continued 

bly  and  the  Republicans  in,  344; 
Constitution  of  1S75,  345;  the 
Senate,  345;  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies,  346;  tlie  President, 
346;  the  ministry,  347;  a  parlia- 
mentary republic,  348;  dissolu- 
tion of  the  National  Assembly 
in,  348;  the  Republic  and  the 
Church,  349;  struggle  between 
MacMahon  and  the  Chamber, 
349;  resignation  of  MacMahon 
and  election  of  Gr6vy,  351;  su- 
premacy of  Republican  party  in, 
351;  Republican  legislation,  351- 
354;  creation  of  a  national  sys- 
tem of  education,  353;  jiubllc 
works,  353;  revision  of  the  con- 
stitution (188J/),  353;  colonial 
policy,  353;  rise  of  Boulangism, 
354-358;  increase  of  the  national 
debt,  354;  demands  of  the  Radi- 
cals, 354;  discontent  with  the 
Republic,  355;  Wilson  scandal, 
355;  resignation  of  Grevy  and 
election  of  Carnot,  355 ;  Boulanger 
crisis,  356;  the  Republic  strength- 
ened, 357;  Paris  Exposition  of 
1S89,  357;  Pope  advises  concilia- 
tory policy  toward  the  Republic 
in,  357;  Dual  Alliance  with 
Russia  (1891),  357;  appearance 
of  the  Socialists  in,  358;  assas- 
sination of  Carnot  (189^)  and 
election  of  Faure,  358;  death  of 
Faure  (1899),  358;  Dreyfus 
Case,  358-364;  significance  of  the 
case,  364;  separation  of  Church 
and  State  in,  364-371 ;  formation 
of  the  "Bloc,"  364;  speech  of 
Waldeck-Rousseau,  Prime  Min- 
ister, concerning  question  of 
Church  and  State  (1900),  365; 
growth  of  religious  orders  in, 
365;  AValdeck-Rousseau  Ministry 
and  the  Law  of  Associations 
(1901),  366;  religious  orders  for- 
bidden to  engage  in  teaching 
(1904),  366;  the  Concordat  of 
1801,  367;  anti-clerical  legisla- 
tion, 367;  the  clergy  in  the  Drey- 
fus affair,  368;  Pius  X  protests 
against  President  Loubet's  visit 
to  Victor  Emmanuel  III,  368; 
abrogation  of  the  Concordat, 
368;  Law  of  1905  and  Associa- 
tions of  Worship,  369;  opposi- 
tion   of    Pius   X,   369-370;    Law 


France,  contimied 
of  January  2,  1907,  370;  separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State  in, 
370;  acquisition  of  colonies  by, 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  371- 
375;  French  colonial  empire 
in  1815,  371;  conquest  of  Al- 
geria, 372-373;  other  African 
conquests,  373;  acquisitions  in 
Cochin-China,  Western  Africa, 
Asia,  and  Madagascar,  373-375; 
and  the  Suez  Canal,  488;  atti- 
tude toward  her  colonies,  546; 
possessions  in  Africa,  1815,  551; 
establishes  protectorate  over 
Tunis,  1881,  554;  acquisitions  in 
Africa,  188^-1890,  554;  at  the 
Conference  of  the  Powers,  1876, 
554;  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin, 
188^-1885,  555;  intervenes  in 
Egypt,  558;  reasons  for  inter- 
vention of,  in  the  Greek  War  of 
Independence,  608-609;  and  the 
Treaty  of  London,  1827,  609; 
battle  of  Navarino,  1827,  610; 
sends  army  into  the  Morea,  611; 
guarantees  independence  of 
Greece,  611;  and  the  "holy 
places"  in  Palestine,  612;  in  the 
Coalition  against  Russia,  613; 
invasion  of  the  Crimea  and 
siege  of  Sebastopol,  614;  Treaty 
of  Paris,  1856,  615;  attitude  of, 
toward  the  breaches  of  the  Ber- 
lin Treaty  of  1878,  629,  640,  644; 
in  Asia,  681;  establishes  trade 
centers  at  the  five  treaty  ports 
of  China,  686;  joins  England  in 
war  against  China,  686;  Treaty 
of  Tientsin  (1858),  686,  con- 
firmed, 687;  intervenes  with  Rus- 
sia and  Germany  in  Japan,  696; 
acquires  a  port  in  China  by 
lease,  697;  helps  to  rescue  the 
legations  in  Peking  (1900),  698 

Franchise,  in  Australia,  532;  in 
Austria,  reform  in  (1873),  399; 
reform  in  (1896),  401;  universal 
(1907),  402;  in  Belgium,  582;  in 
Canada,  Dominion  of  (1867), 
529;  in  Denmark,  594;  in  Eng- 
land (1815),  410-415;  by  Reform 
Bill  of  1832,  437-438;  by  Re- 
form Bill  of  1867,  463-464;  for 
women.  Mill's  speech  in  favor 
of,  464;  by  Reform  Bill  of 
188.'f,  492-493;  qualifications  for, 
495-496;     for     women,     present 


794 


INDEX 


Franchise,  confinued 
status  of  (1909),  516-517;  in 
Finland,  universal  (1906),  718; 
in  France, Constitutional  Charter 
(1S14),  68;  Electoral  Law 
(1S17),  77;  Electoral  Law 
(1820),  80;  Electoral  Law 
(1S31),  117;  under  the  Pro- 
visional Government,  190;  Law 
of  1S50,  202;  under  the  Second 
Empire,  209;  under  the  Third 
Republic,  346;  in  Germany,  304; 
in  Greece,  634;  in  Holland 
(1815),  579;  (18^8),  580;  by 
amendments  to  the  Constitution 
(1887  and  1896),  581;  in  Hun- 
gary, 404;  in  Iceland,  595;  in 
Italy,  reform  of  (1882),  381; 
in  JajDan,  694;  in  New  Zealand, 
536;  in  Norway,  600;  in  Portu- 
gal, 577;  in  Prussia,  186,  326; 
in  Roumania,  632;  in  Russia 
(1909),  716;  in  Spain,  universal 
(1890),  575;  in  Sweden,  600;  in 
Switzerland,  586;  in  Turkey 
(1908),  642;  in  Union  of  South 
Africa     544-545 

Francis  I,  of  Austria  (11 68-1835), 
character  of,  19;  and  Metter- 
nich,  25,   152 

Francis  II,  King  of  Naples,  Re- 
volt against,  232;  flees  from 
Naples  on  advance  of  Garibaldi, 
235;  flees  from  Gaeta  to  Rome, 
237 

Francis  Joseph  I,  18Ii8—,  acces- 
sion of,  179;  appeals  to  Nicholas 
I  for  aid  against  Hungary,  180; 
interview  with  Napoleon  III  at 
Villafranca,  225;  alliance  of  the 
Three  Emperors,  320;  and  the 
Magyars  in  Hungary,  388;  re- 
vokes the  Constitution  of  18Ji9, 
388;  reverses  his  policy,  389; 
grants  a  constitution  (1861),  to 
Austria,  390;  attitude  of  Hun- 
gary towards,  391;  yields,  393; 
accepts  Compromise  of  1861, 
393;  crowned  King  of  Hun- 
gary (1867),  393;  and  the  de- 
mands of  the  Czechs,  397-398; 
and  the  question  of  language, 
404;  annexes  Bosnia  and  Herze- 
govina  (1908),  639-640 

Franco-German   War,   285-302 

Frankfort,  German  National  As- 
sembly or  Parliament  of,  174, 
175;  work  of,  183;  rejection  of 


Frankfort,  continued 
the  work  of,  185;  entered  by  the 
Prussians  (1866),  265;  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Prussian  Kingdom, 
267;  Treaty  of  (1811),  300,  338; 
and  relation  of  Treaty  of,  to 
Triple  Alliance,  319.  See  also 
Diet  of  Frankfort 

Frederick  III,  German  Emperor, 
March  9-June  15,  1888,  305; 
succeeds  his  father  William  I, 
322;  death  of,  322 

Frederick  VI,  King  of  Denmark 
(1808-1839),  loses  Norway,  592; 
establishes  consultative  assem- 
blies, 1834,  592 

Frederick  VII,  King  of  Denmark 
(1848-1863),  257;  grants  con- 
stitution (1849)  to  the  Islands 
and  Jutland,  593;  grants  con- 
stitutions of  1854  and  1855, 
593;  and  Schleswig-Holstein,  593 

Frederick  VIII,  King  of  Den- 
mark,  1906—,   595 

Frederick  William  III,  King  of 
Prussia  (1191-1840),  character 
of,  19;  becomes  reactionary,  38- 
43;  government  of,  146-149; 
death  of  (1840),  149 

Frederick  William  IV,  King  of 
Prussia  (I84O-IS6I),  character 
of,  149;  issues  the  Letter  Pa- 
tent of  February  (I84I),  151; 
conflict  with  the  United  Landtag, 
152;  promises  to  call  a  repre- 
sentative assembly  to  draw  up  a 
constitution,  174;  offered  leader- 
ship in  Germany,  184;  declines 
the  offer,  185;  the  "humiliation 
of  Olmiitz,"  185;  grants  con- 
stitution of  1850,  185-186;  be- 
comes reactionary,  241 ;  William 
I  becomes  Regent  for,  247;  death 
of,  247 

Free  Trade,  in  England,  Bismarck 
on,  310-312;  450-455,  548 

Freiburg,   590 

French    Congo,    founded,    353 

French  Constitution  of  1191,  46, 
576 

French  Guiana,  359 

French  Revolution  (1189),  effects 
of,  in  France,  66;  influence  of, 
shown  in  the  Constitutional 
Charter,  69;  loss  of  French 
colonies  as  a  result  of,  371; 
effect  of,  upon  England,  417, 
519 


INDEX 


795 


French    Soudan,    374 
Freytag,   246 
Fujiyama,  687 

Fuifton,  and  the  Clermont,  723 
Fundamental  Law  of  1815   (Hol- 
land),  3T9 


Gaeta,  Francis  II  flees  to,  235, 
236;  siege  of,  237;  fall  of, 
237 

Gag  Laws  or  Six  Acts  (England), 
1819,  422 

Galicia,  62;  position  in  the  Aus- 
trian Empire  (1861),  390;  Poles 
in,  favored  by  Taaffe  Ministry, 
400 

Galvani,  386 

Galway,   484;    college   at,   516 

Gambetta,  L^on  ^iS^O-iSS^A  emer- 
gence of,  281 ;  denounces  Na- 
poleon III,  282;  284;  votes 
against  war  with  Prussia,  293; 
proclaims  the  French  Repub- 
lic after  the  surrender  of 
the  Emperor  at  Sedan,  297; 
escapes  from  Paris  and  organ- 
izes new  armies,  298;  defeated, 
329;  attitude  toward  the  Com- 
munists, 336;  and  the  Republic, 
344;  attitude  toward  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  349,  366;  Brog- 
lie  Ministry  against,  330;  presi- 
dent of  the  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties, 351 ;  death  of  (1882),  355 

Gapon,  Father,  710 

Garibaldi,  Giuseppe,  1807-1882, 
joins  Young  Italy,  162;  attitude 
toward  Cavour  after  the  cession 
of  Nice,  231;  early  life,  232;  and 
the  defense  of  Rome,  233;  deter- 
mines to  go  to  Sicily,  233;  and 
Cavour,  234;  conquers  Sicily  and 
assumes  the  dictatorship,  235; 
conquers  Naples,  235;  proposes 
to  attack  Rome,  235;  requests 
Victor  Emmanuel  to  dismiss 
Cavour,  237;  meeting  with  Vic- 
tor Emmanuel,  237;  retires  to 
Caprera,  237 

Gastein,  Convention  of,  259,  261 

Gatton,  413 

General  Strike,  The  resort  to  the, 
in  Russia  (1905),  711-712 

Geneva  Commission,  1872,  486,  591 

Genoa,  Republic  of,  incorporated 
in  Sardinia,  3,  5,  52;  "  The  Thov^ 
sand  "  embark  from,  234 


Gentz,   15 

George,  Prince,  son  of  George  I 
of  Greece,  administrator  of 
Crete,  635 

George  I,  King  of  Greece,  1863 
— ,  634-635;  acquires  the  Ionian 
Islands,  186.'i,  634;  acquires 
Thessaly,  1881,  634 

George  I,  of  England,  Elector  of 
Hanover,  446 

George  HI  (1760-1820),  death  of, 
422;  opposition  to  Catholic 
Emancipation,  426;  445;  and 
New  South  Wales,  531 

George  IV  (1820-1830),  acces- 
sion of,  422;  opposition  to 
Catholic  Emancipation,  426;  and 
the  Catholic  Emancipation  Act, 
428;  death  of,  428 

German  Confederation,  organized 
by  the  Congress  of  Vienna 
(1815),  29;  the  Diet  of,  29-30; 
international  character  of,  31-32; 
and  Metternich,  35,  173;  restored 
(1851),  185,  388;  Holstein  a  part 
of,  257;  Bismarck  proposes  a 
reform  of,  262;  Prussia  with- 
draws from,  263;  declared  dis- 
solved by  Prussia,  263;  ceases 
to  exist,  267-268 

German  East  Africa,  319 

German  Empire,  303-328.  See 
Germany 

German  Southwest  Africa,  319 

Germany,  and  the  Treatj'  of  Paris 
(1814),  3;  the  Metternich  sys- 
tem in,  28,  35;  reaction  in,  28- 
44;  varieties  of  states  in,  29; 
Act  of  Federation  of,  at  the 
Congress  of  Vienna,  29,  32;  the 
Diet  of  the  Confederation  of,  29- 
30 ;  international  character  of,  31- 
32;  problem  of  unity  in,  32-36; 
demand  for  constitutional  gov- 
ernment in,  35-37;  the  King  of 
Prussia  becomes  reactionary,  38; 
ferment  in  the  universities  of, 
39;  Wartburg  Festival,  39;  mur- 
der of  Kotzebue,  40;  decrees  of 
the  conference  of  Carlsbad,  41- 
44;  influence  of  July  Revolution 
(1830)  in,  100;  revolution  (1830) 
in,  112;  new  measures  of  re- 
pression, 112;  Metternich  su- 
preme in,  113;  revolution  (18^8) 
in,  173;  Vorparlament,  174;  Par- 
liament of  Frankfort,  174; 
March    (18^8)    revolutions    tri- 


796 


INDEX 


Germany,  continued 
iiniphaiit  in,  174;  work  of  the 
Frankfort  Parliament,  183;  lead- 
ership in,  offered  to  the  King 
of  Prussia,  184;  the  offer  de- 
clined, 185;  rejection  of  the 
work  of  the  Frankfort  Parlia- 
ment, 185;  and  the  "humiliation 
of  Olniiitz,"  185;  Austria  demands 
that  the  old  German  Confedera- 
tion of  1S15  be  revived  in 
(1S51),  185;  reaction  in,  after 
18J,9,  240-:243;  emigration  from, 
241 ;  economic  transformation 
of  243;  industrial  development 
of,  244;  rise  of  a  wealthy  mid- 
dle class  in,  245;  intellectual 
activity  in,  245;  influence  of 
events  in  Italy  upon  thought  in, 
246;  founding  of  the  National 
Union  in,  246;  Bismarck's  plan 
for  unity  in,  255-256;  and 
Schleswig-Holstein,  256-267;  and 
the  Danish  war,  258;  friction  be- 
tween Austria  and  Prussia,  259; 
Convention  of  Gastein,  259;  war 
between  Austria  and  Prussia, 
263-267;  Treaty  of  Prague,  263, 
267;  North  German  Confedera- 
tion formed,  268;  organization 
and  government  of,  269;  alliance 
with  South  German  States,  270; 
consolidation  of  the  new  system 
in,  270;  South  German  States 
join  Prussia  in  war  against 
France,  293 ;  Franco-German 
war,  293-299;  invasion  of 
France,  296;  Germans  defeat 
French  at  Worth,  Forbach, 
Spicheren,  Borny,  Mars-la-Tours, 
and  Gravelotte,  296;  Union  of 
Northern  and  Southern  States 
completes  German  unification, 
301 ;  King  William  I  becomes 
Emperor  in,  301 ;  growth  of 
national  feeling  in,  since  1815, 
303;  constitution  of  the  new  Ger- 
man Empire,  303-305;  and  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  306 ;  the 
Kulturkampf  in,  306-310;  causes 
of  the  Kulturkampf,  306;  forma- 
tion of  the  Center  Part.y,  307; 
Dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility, 
307;  the  Old  Catholics,  307;  the 
Falk  Laws,  308;  conflict  of 
Church  and  State,  308;  Falk 
Laws  suspended  (1819),  309; 
rescinded   (1886),  309;  religious 


Germanj^    continued 

orders  except  Jesuits  permitted 
to  return  to  (1887),  309;  adopts 
the  policy  of  protection,  310; 
growth  of  Socialism  in,  312;  at- 
tempts upon  the  life  of  the  Em- 
peror, 313;  measures  against 
the  Socialists,  313;  failure  of 
these  measures  and  continued 
growth  of  the  Socialist  party 
in,  314;  the  Imperial  Govern- 
ment of,  undertakes  social  re- 
form, 315;  Sickness  Insurance 
Law  (1883),  Accident  Insurance 
Laws  (1884  and  1885),  Old  Age 
Insurance  Law  (1889),  316;  a 
colonial  empire  results  from  the 
adoption  of  the  policy  of  pro- 
tection in,  318;  colonies  in  Af- 
rica, 319;  alliance  of  the  Three 
Emperors,  320;  Austro-German 
Treaty  of  1879,  321;  Triple  Al- 
liance (1882),  321,  382;  death  of 
William  I,  322;  accession  and 
death  of  Frederick  III,  322;  ac- 
cession of  William  II,  322;  Anti- 
Socialist  policy  abandoned,  323; 
expansion  of  German  industry, 
324;  as  a  naval  power,  324;  con- 
tinued growth  of  socialism  in, 
324;  the  Social  Democratic  party 
numerically  the  largest  in,  325; 
demand  for  electoral  reform  in 
Prussia,  326;  demand  for  par- 
liamentary reform  in,  326;  de- 
mand for  ministerial  responsi- 
bility in,  327;  the  present  situa- 
tion" in  (1909),  328;  troops  with- 
drawn from  France  (1871- 
1872),  338;  emigration  from, 
ceases  (1908),  386;  attitude  to- 
ward her  colonies,  546;  growth 
of,  546;  acquisitions  in  Africa, 
1884-1890,  554;  at  the  Confer- 
ence of  the  Powers,  1876,  554; 
at  the  Conference  of  Berlin, 
1884-1885,  555;  and  the  Congress 
of  Berlin  (1878),  625-626;  atti- 
tude of,  toward  the  breaches  of 
the  Berlin  Treaty  (1878),  629, 
640;  intervenes  with  Russia  and 
France  in  Japan,  696;  establishes 
a  "  sphere  of  influence  "  in  China 
(1898),  697;  helps  to- rescue  the 
legations  in  Peking  (1900),  698 

Gioberti,  1801-1852,  164-165;  au- 
thor of  "  The  Moral  and  Civil 
Primacy    of    the    Italians/'    164 


INDEX 


797 


Gladstone,  William  Ewart,  1809- 
1898,  denounces  the  Neapolitan 
government,  215;  and  the  tariff, 
455;  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer (1852-1855,  1859-1866) 
and  his  policy,  459;  and  Postal 
Savings  Banks  (1862),  459;  and 
State  Insurance  (lS6-'f),  459;  in- 
troduces Reform  Bill  of  1866, 
which  is  defeated,  461-462;  and 
the  Reform  Bill  of  1867,  463; 
early  life  of,  465;  enters  Parlia- 
ment (1833),  466;  leader  of  the 
Liberal  Party,  466;  First  Minis- 
try of  (1868-187/}),  466;  and 
Ireland,  467;  Reforms  of; — dis- 
establishment of  the  Anglican 
Church  in  Ireland  (1869),  472; 
Irish  Land  Act  of  1870,  475; 
Forster  Education  Act  of  1870, 
478;  abolition  of  the  purchase 
system  in  the  army  (1871),  482; 
Civil  Service  reform  (1870), 
482;  Ballot  Law  of  1872,  483- 
484; — waning  popularity  of,  484; 
Irish  University  Bill  of  1873  de- 
feated, 485;  resigns  but  returns 
to  office,  485;  unpopularity  of 
the  foreign  policy  of,  486;  and 
the  Alabama  award,  486;  fall  of 
ministry  of,  486;  Second  Minis- 
try of,  1880-1885,  490-496;  Re- 
form Bill  of  1884,  492;  Redis- 
tribution Act  of  1885,  493;  fall 
of  the  ministry  of,  1885,  497; 
and  the  Irish  Home  Rule  Move- 
ment, 497-499;  Third  Ministry  of 
(1886),  499;  introduces  the  Home 
Rule  Bill,  500;  and  the  Land 
Purchase  Bill,  501 ;  and  the  de- 
feat of  the  Home  Rule  Bill,  504; 
dissolves  Parliament,  appeals  to 
the  people  and  is  defeated,  504; 
Fourth  Ministry  of  (1892-189Jt), 
507-510;  introduces  Second 
Home  Rule  Bill  (1893),  507- 
509;  Parish  Councils  Bill  of 
189Ji,  509;  resigns  (189/,),  510; 
on  the  House  of  Lords,  510; 
death  of  (1898),  510;  policy  of, 
in  South  Africa,  539;  and  the 
Pretoria  Convention  of  1881, 
540;  and  the  London  Convention 
of  188/,,  540;  and  Egypt,  560- 
561;    denounces    the    Turks,    622 

Glasgow,  gain  of,  in  House  of 
Commons  by  Redistribution  Act 
of  1885,  494 


Gneisenau,  44 

Gneist,  estimate  of,  concerning 
cultivable  land  in  the  United 
Kingdom,  412 

Goethe,  on  Frederick  William  IV, 
149 

Gogol,  653 

Gordon,  General,  in  the  Soudan, 
561-562;  death  of,  562 

Gorcmykin,  Prime  Minister,  issues 
in  the  name  of  the  Tsar  the  "  or- 
ganic laws,"  713;  715 

Gorgei,  Hungarian  commander, 
capitulates  at  Vihigos,   180 

Gortchakoff,  Russian  Chancellor, 
on   the   Congress   of   Berlin,  320 

Goschen,  George  Joachim,  in  the 
Gladstone  Ministry,  1868,  465; 
becomes   a  Liberal-Unionist,  504 

Gotha,  Socialist  programme  of 
1875,  adopted  at,  312 

Gramont,  Duke  of,  and  the  Span- 
ish candidacy  of  Prince  Leo- 
pold, 290-291 

Granville,  Lord,  on  England  and 
Egypt,  560 

Grattan,  498 

Gravelotte,  Germans  defeat  French 
at,  296 

Great   Britain.     See    England 

Great  Western,  sails  from  Bristol 
to  New  York,  724 

Greece,  War  of  Independence  of, 
604-611;  condition  of  the  Greeks 
(1820),  604;  intellectual  revival 
in,  605;  the  Hetairia  Philike 
founded  in  (181/,),  605;  char- 
acter of  the  war  in  (1821-1829), 
606;  foreign  intervention  in,  607- 
609;  and  the  battle  of  Navarino 
(1827),  610;  creation  of  the 
Kingdom  of,  611;  opposes  the 
Treaty  of  San  Stefano  (1878), 
624;  and  the  Congress  of  Ber- 
lin (1878),  626;  since  1833,  633- 
636;  reign  of  Otto  I,  633-634; 
the  monarchy  of,  becomes  con- 
stitutional (18///,),  634;  England 
cedes  the  Ionian  Islands  to, 
186/,,  634;  Constitution  of  186  i, 
634;  annexes  Thessaly,  1881,  634; 
declares  war  against  Turkey, 
(1897),  is  defeated  and  loses 
parts  of  Thessaly,  635;  and 
Crete,  635;  present  condition  of, 
635;  aspirations  of,  635;  Crete 
declares  for  union  with,  1908, 
639 


798 


INDEX 


Greek  Church,  Ecclesiastics  of, 
hanged,  606;  in  Russia,  645; 
Alexander  III  and,  670 

Greenland,    594 

Gregoire,  elected  to  French  Cham- 
ber of  Deputies,  is  excluded,  79 

Gre\y,  Jules,  proposition  of,  con- 
cerning the  Presidency  of  the 
Second  Republic,  197;  elected 
President  of  the  Third  Republic, 
351 ;  forced  to  resign,  355 

Grey,  Earl,  Prime  Minister,  and 
the  First  Reform  Bill,  430;  re- 
signs, 436;  recalled  and  given 
power  to  create  Peers  to  pass 
the  Reform  Bill,  436;  succeeded 
by   Lord   Melbourne,   451 

Grey,  Sir  Edward,  British  Foreign 
Minister,  on  the  infraction  of 
the  Berlin  Treaty  of  1878 
(1908),  641 

Grote,  and  the  secret  ballot,  483 

Guadaloupe,  French  possession 
(1815),  371 

Guam,  319 

Guiana,  in  South  America,  French 
possession,  1815,  371;  part  of 
Dutch,  acquired  by  England, 
519 

Guinea,  French  annexations  in,  374 

Guizot,  Courses  of,  suspended,  86; 
reinstated,  89;  and  the  conserv- 
ative party,  130;  rivalry  of 
Thiers  and,  130;  ministry  of 
(18.'fO-18iS),  133-142;  observa- 
tion of,  concerning  Cavour, 
232;  on  the  OUivier  Ministry  and 
the  Hohenzollern  candidacy,  292 

Gustavus  IV,  King  of  Sweden,  11 

Gustavus  V,  King  of  Sweden, 
1907—,  600 


Haakon  VII,  King  of  Norway, 
1905—,   600 

Habeas  Corpus  Act,  suspension  of, 
in  England,  1817,  421 ;  suspen- 
sion of,  in  Ireland,  470 

Hadley,  A.  T.,  on  the  importance 
of  railroads,  725 

Hague,  The,  Norway  and  Sweden 
and  the  International  Arbitra- 
tion Tribunal  at,  600;  First 
Peace  Conference  (1899),  730- 
733;  Second  Peace  Conference 
(1907),  734-735 

Hallam,  Arthur,  and  Gladstone  at 
Eton,   465 


Ham,  Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte 
imprisoned   at,   129,   199,  278 

Hamburg,  member  of  the  North 
German  Confederation,  268; 
member  of  German  Empire,  304; 
merchants  of,  establish  trading 
stations,  318 

Hamburg-American  steamship  line, 
established   (1847),  724 

Hanotaux,  description  of  the 
"  bloody  week "  in  Paris,  335, 
336;  on  the  constitution  of  1875, 
348 

Hanover,  importance  of,  in  the 
German  Diet,  30;  a  possession 
of  the  English  royal  family,  31; 
form  of  government  in,  36;  and 
the  ZoUverein,  149;  the  National 
Union  founded  in,  246;  supports 
Austria  in  the  war  of  1866,  263; 
conquered  by  Prussia,  264-265; 
King  of,  taken  prisoner,  264; 
incorporated  in  the  Prussian 
Kingdom,  267;  England  loses, 
446 

Hanseatic  towns,  149 

Hapsburg,  House  of,  advantages 
gained  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  8;  ancient  possessions 
of,  23;  Hungary  renounces  al- 
legiance to,  179;  territorial 
gains  and  losses  of,  404 

Harbin,   697,   699 

Harcourt,  Sir  William  Vernon, 
and  the  budget  of  1894,  511 

Hargreaves,    407,    722 

Harrow,  477 

Hartington,  Lord  (later  Duke  of 
Devonshire)  becomes  a  Liberal- 
Unionist,  504 

Haussmann,  Baron,  beautifies  Paris, 
212 

Hedlev,  William,  constructs  the 
Ptifpng  Billy,  724 

Heidelberg,  Liberals  at,  call  the 
Vorparlament,  174 

Heligoland,  retained  by  England 
in  1815,  9,  519 

Helmholtz,   246 

Henry,  Colonel,  and  the  Dreyfus 
Case,  359;  commits  suicide, 
361 

Herzegovina  occupied  by  Austria, 
320;  gained  by  Austria-Hun- 
gary, 404;  formally  annexed  by 
Austria-Hungary  '(1908),  405, 
639-640;  insurrection  of,  1875, 
620 


INDEX 


799 


Hesse-Cassel,  revolutionary  move- 
ments in  (1S30),  112;  supports 
Austria  in  the  war  of  1S66,  263; 
Elector  of,  taken  prisoner  by 
Prussia,  264;  incorporated  in  the 
Prussian  Kingdom,  267 

Hesse-Darmstadt,  granted  constitu- 
tion (1820),  37;  supports  Aus- 
tria in  the  war  of  186G,  263 

Hetairia    Philiiie    (ISUfJ,   605 

Hohenlohe,  German  Chancellor, 
1894-1900,  323 

Hohenzollern,  The  Spanish  can- 
didacy of  Leopold  of,  290-292; 
619 

Holland,  acquisitions  of,  by  Treaty 
of  Paris  (1814),  3;  King  of,  a 
member  of  the  German  Confed- 
eration, 31 ;  and  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  101 ;  and  the  Belgians, 
101-104;  influence  of  the  July 
Revolution  (1830)  in,  103;  Bel- 
gium becomes  a  kingdom  inde- 
pendent of,  105;  New,  531;  Eng- 
land seizes  Cape  Colony,  a  pos- 
session of,  536;  stations  of,  in 
Africa  (1815),  551;  since  1830, 
579-581;  rulers  in,  since  1830, 
579;  Fundamental  Law  of  1815 
in,  579;  Constitution  of  1848  in, 
580;  extension  of  the  franchise 
in,  581;  colonies  of,  581;  estab- 
lishes trade  centers  at  the  five 
treaty  ports  of  China,  686;  ob- 
tains a  trading  station  on  the 
peninsula  of  Deshima,  690;  also 
called   The    Netherlands 

Holstein,  member  of  German  Diet, 
31,  257.     See  Schleswig-Holstein 

Holy  Alliance  (1815),  Alexander 
I  and,  14,  649;  composition  and 
character  of,  14-16;  and  Metter- 
nich,  18;  converted  into  an  engine 
of  oppression,  40;  triumph  of, 
in  Naples,  Piedmont,  and  Spain, 
63,  564;  and  the  Spanish-Ameri- 
can colonies,  64-65;  powerless- 
ness  of  (1830),  100;  England's 
defiance  of,  422,  608 

Holy   Roman   Empire,   29,   35 

Holyrood    Palace,   98 

Home  Government  Association  of 
Ireland.  See  Home  Rule  (Ire- 
land) 

Home  Rule  (Ireland),  Movement, 
492;  Party  formed,  497;  leaders 
of,  party  adopt  policy  of  ob- 
struction, 498;  party  holds  bal- 


Home   Rule,   continued 
ance  of  power  (1886),  500;  First 
Bill    for    (1886),    500-504;    Sec- 
ond Bill  for  (1893),  507-509 

Hong  Kong,  ceded  to  England  by 
China  (1842),  685 

"Hopes  of  Italy"  (1844)  by 
Cesare  Balbo,  165 

Hotel  de  Ville,  Lafayette  and 
Louis  Philippe  (1830)  at,  97; 
meeting  place  of  Provisional 
Government,  144,  191 ;  proclama- 
tion of  the  French  Republic  at, 
297 

"  House  of  Commons,  The  Rotten," 
by  Lovett,  447 

Hudson  Bay  territory,  English 
possession,  519,  523;  purchased 
by  the  Dominion  of  Canada, 
1869,  529 

Hugo,  Victor,  275 

Humbert  I,  King  of  Italy  (1818- 
1900),  succeeds  his  father,  Vic- 
tor Emmanuel  II,  380;  reforms 
under,  381;  and  the  Triple  Al- 
liance ("iSS^^),  382;  assassination 
of  (1900),  384 

Hundred   Days,   13 

Hungarian  Constitution  before 
1848,  155 

Hungary,  a  part  of  the  Austrian 
Empire,  23;  races  in,  24;  gov- 
ernment of,  26;  national  and 
racial  movement  in,  154;  consti- 
tution of,  before  1848,  155;  im- 
portance of  the  nobility  in,  155; 
feudalism  in,  155;  Szechenyi  and 
reform  in,  156;  the  language 
question  in  the  Diet  of,  157; 
rise  of  a  radical  party  in,  157; 
Kossuth,  158;  demands  of  the 
Hungarians  in  1841,  159;  the 
decisive  intervention  of,  169; 
Kossuth's  speech  against  Aus- 
tria, 169;  Diet  of,  passes  the 
March  Laws,  170;  becomes  prac- 
tically independent,  171;  civil 
dissension  in,  176;  Austria  ex- 
ploits the  situation  in,  177;  radi- 
cal party  in,  seizes  control,  178; 
declares  Francis  Joseph  a  usurp- 
er, 179;  war  with  Austria,  179; 
declares  her  independence,  179; 
conquered,  180;  constitutional 
rights  of,  abolished,  180;  Aus- 
tria's vengeance  in,  180;  attitude 
toward  Austria  in  the  Austro- 
Prussian  War  (1866),  266;  Aus- 


800 


INDEX 


Hungary,  continued 
tria's  punishment  of,  388;  posi- 
tion of,  in  the  Empire  (1S61), 
390;  refuses  to  cooperate  with 
Austria,  390;  asserts  her  "his- 
toric rights,"  391 ;  demands 
restoration  of  her  constitution 
of  ISJfS,  39:3;  Compromise  of 
1S61,  393-396;  Francis  Joseph 
crowned  King  of  (1861),  393; 
constitution  (IS^'/S)  restored,  395; 
Magj'ars,  the  dominant  race  in, 
395;  divisive  effect  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  nationality  in,  396;  op- 
position of  Magyars  to  the  de- 
mands of  the  Czechs  in,  398; 
Kingdom  of,  since  1SG7,  402- 
405;  the  Magyars  and  the  policy 
of  Magj^arization,  403;  the 
Croatians  in,  403;  race  ques- 
tions in,  403;  struggle  over  the 
question  of  language  in,  404; 
suffrage  in,  404.  See  Austria- 
Hungary 

Hunt,  at  Peterloo,  421 ;  speech  on 
the  Reform  Bill,  433 

Huskisson,  422;  economic  reforms 
of,  423;  reform  in  Navigation 
Laws,   1823-1825,   451 

Ibrahim,  son  of  Mehemet  Ali,  602; 
conquers  Morea  for  Turkey, 
607;  and  the  battle  of  Navarino, 
1827,  610 

Iceland,  594;  granted  home  rule 
(1874),  595 

Ilchester,  Borough  of,  433 

Illiteracy,  in  Italy,  381 ;  decline 
of,  in  England,  515;  in  Spain, 
575 

Illyrian  Provinces,  given  to  Aus- 
tria by  Congress  of  Vienna,  8 

Imperial  Federation  (England), 
545-549;  problem  of,  and  its 
increasing  importance,  546;  dif- 
ficulties in  the  way  of,  547; 
colonial  conferences  and,  548; 
confederations  within  the  Em- 
pire, 549 

Imperialism,  in  England,  487; 
Joseph  Chamberlain  and,  511 

India,  French  possessions  (1815) 
in,  371;  Civil  Service  in,  482; 
Queen  of  England  proclaimed 
Empress  of  (1877),  489,  522; 
English  possessions  in,  prior  to 
1815,  519;  work  of  the  East 
India      Company     in,     519-520; 


India,  continued 
overthrow  of  the  Mahratta  con- 
federacy in  (1816-1818)  520; 
England  annexes  the  Punjab  in 
(1845-1849),  520;  Sepoy  Mutiny 
in  (1857),  520-521;  government 
of,  transferred  to  the  Crown 
(1858),  522;  declared  an  Em- 
pire (1876),  522;  government  of, 
522;  population  of,  522;  and  the 
South  African  War  (1809),  544; 
and  the  Opium  War,  685 

Indian   Mutiny,   521 

Indian  Ocean,  French  colonial  ex- 
pansion in,  under  the  Third  Re- 
public, 373;  French  colony  of 
Madagascar   in,  374 

Indo-China,  French  colonial  ex- 
pansion in,  under  the  Third  Re- 
public, 373,  681 

Industrial  Legislation; — in  France, 
under  the  Provisional  Govern- 
ment (1848),  191-192;— in  Eng- 
land, agitation  for  improved 
conditions  of  labor  by  Owen, 
Sadler,  Fielden,  and  Ashley, 
442;  Factory  Act  of  1833,  442; 
Labor  in  Mines  Act  of  1842, 
455;  Factory  Acts  of  1844, 
1847,  and  1850,  456;  Factory 
and  Workshop  Consolidation 
Act  of  1878,  456;  Act  (1889) 
regulating  the  employment  of 
women  and  children,  506-507; 
Factory  and  Workshop  Act  of 
1901,  457;— in  New  Zealand, 
535-536 

Industrial  Revolution,  in  France, 
137;  in  Austria,  153;  in  Ger- 
many, 244;  in  England,  406-409; 
in  Russia,  673-676;  rise  of  the 
factory  system,  722 

Inglis,  Sir  Robert,  speech  of,  in 
opposition  to  the  Reform  Bill, 
432;   Macaulay's   reply  to,  434 

Inheritance  tax,  in  England,  511; 
in   New   Zealand,   535 

Initiative,  The,  in  Switzerland,  589- 
590 

Inkermann,  battle  of,  614 

Inquisition,  The,  in  Spain,  47;  in 
the  States  of  the  Church,  55 

Institute  of  Mining  Engineers  at 
St.  Petersburg,  Resolution  of, 
on  the  war  with  Japan,  706-707 

Insurance  Laws,  Germany,  Sick- 
ness (1883),  Accident  (1884 
and  1885),  Old  Age  (1889),  316 


INDEX 


801 


Inysurance,  State,  Germany  and, 
315-316;  Austria  and,  400;  Eng- 
land and,  459,  515-510;  New 
Zealand  and,  535-536;  Denmark 
and,    594 

Interpellation,  Right  of,  granted 
in    France    (1SG7J,   381 

Intervention,  Doctrine  of  the 
right  of,  58-60;  application  of, 
nee  also  Congresses  and  Holy 
Alliance 

Ionian  Islands,  occupied  by  Eng- 
land, 9;  protectorate  of  England 
over,  519;  England  cedes,  to 
Greece,  ISGJf,  634 

Ireland,  Rejiresentation  in  House 
of  Commons  (1815),  410;  suf- 
frage in,  426;  O'Connell  founds 
the  Catholic  Association  in,  437; 
O'Connell  elected  to  Parliament 
from  County  of  Clare,  427;  re- 
striction of  the  suffrage  in,  428; 
given  increased  representation, 
437;  famine  of  lS-'i5-lS-',7,  453, 
469;  Reform  Bill  (186S)  for,  464; 
Gladstone  and,  467;  condition 
(1S15)  in,  467-469;  Catholic 
Emancipation  Act  (1829),  469; 
franchise  qualification  in,  raised, 
469;  Repeal  agitation  in,  469; 
O'Connell  and  the  Irish  party 
in,  469;  Young  Ireland,  469;  de- 
cline of  the  population  in,  470; 
and  the  Fenian  Movement,  470; 
suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus 
Act  in,  470;  the  Irish  Church, 
468,  471;  the  tithe  war  in,  472; 
disestablishment  of  the  Irish 
Church  (1869),  473;  system  of 
land  tenure  in,  473-474;  misery 
of  the  peasants  in,  474;  the 
Ulster  system  of  land  tenure  in, 
475;  Land  Act  of  1870,  475- 
477;  Irish  University  Bill  of 
1873  defeated,  485;  failure  of 
the  Land  Act  of  1870,  490;  the 
Three  F's,  Land  Act  of  1881 
and  the  Land  Court,  491;  Re- 
form Bill  (1884)  for,  493;  and 
the  Home  Rule  Movement,  497; 
Home  Rulers  hold  balance 
of  power  (1886),  500;  First 
Home  Rule  Bill  (1886),  500-504; 
Land  Purchase  Bill  introduced, 
1886,  501 ;  policy  of  coercion  for, 
under  the  Second  Salisbury  Min- 
istry, 505;  Land  Purchase  Act, 
1891,     505-506;     Land     Act     of 


Ireland,  contirmed 
1903,  506;  Second  Home  Rule 
Bill  (1893),  507-509;  Land  Pur- 
chase Act  of  1896,  512;  Local 
Government  Act  (1898),  512; 
Old  Age  Pensions  Law  in,  516; 
Irish  University  or  Birrell  Act 
(1908),  516 

Irish  Church,  position  of,  in  1815, 
468,  471;  and  the  Tithe  War, 
472;  disestablishment  of  (1869), 
472 

Irish  Local  Government  Act,  1898, 
512 

Irish  University,  established  (1908) 
by  the  Birrell  Act,  516 

Isabella  II,  of  Spain  (1833-1868), 
daughter  of  Ferdinand  VII, 
proclaimed  Queen,  566;  declared 
of  age  (18Ii3),  568;  absolutism 
of,  569;  overthrow  of,  290,  569; 
abdicates  in  favor  of  her  son 
Alfonso,   570 

Islands,  The,  of  Denmark,  Fred- 
erick VI  grants  a  consultative 
assembly  to,  592;  Frederick  VII 
grants  a  constitution  (18Jf9)  to, 
593 

Isle  of  France,  retained  by  Eng- 
land in  1815,  9 

Ismail,  Viceroy  of  Egypt,  1863- 
1866,  Khedive  of  Egypt  1866- 
1879,  extravagance  of,  558;  sells 
shares  in  the  Suez  Canal  Com- 
pany to  England  (1875),  558; 
abdicates,   559 

Italian  War  of  1859,  213,  225-229 

Italy,  decision  of  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  concerning,  8-10,  52;  the 
Metternich  system  in,  28;  reac- 
tion and  revolution  in,  50-62; 
Napoleon  on  Italian  unity,  50; 
significance  of  Napoleon's  activ- 
ity in,  51;  awakening  of,  51- 
52;  dominance  of  Austria  in,  53- 
54;  government  in,  53-56;  the 
Carbonari  in,  56;  revolution  in 
Naples  (1820),  57;  revolution  in 
Piedmont  (1821),  61;  influence 
of  the  July  Revolution  (1830) 
in,  100;  revolutions  in,  110-112; 
conditions  in,  after  the  revolu- 
tions of  1820,  110;  revolutionary 
movements  (1831)  in,  110;  Aus- 
trian intervention  in,  111;  the 
French  seize  Ancona,  111;  re- 
sults of  the  insurrections  in, 
111-112;  1830-184  8,  159-168; 


802 


INDEX 


Italy,  continued 
after  1831,  159;  Mazzini,  160- 
164;  Young  Italy,  161;  Gioberti, 
164-165;  D'Azeglio,  165;  Balbo, 
165;  the  Risorgimento,  166;  elec- 
tion and  policy  of  Pius  IX  in, 
166;  reforms  in  Tuscany  and 
Piedmont,  167;  revolution  in  the 
Kingdom  of  Naples  (IS^S),  167; 
revolution  in  Lombardy-Venetia, 
172;  renounces  Austrian  con- 
trol, 173;  March  (1848)  revo- 
lutions triumphant  in,  174;  par- 
tially conquered,  175;  battle  of 
Custozza  (1848)  in,  176;  con- 
quest of,  completed,  181 ;  battle 
of  Novara,  181;  French  inter- 
vention in  Rome,  183;  fall  of 
Venice,  182;  reaction  in,  after 
1848,  215;  Victor  Emmanuel  II, 
King  of  Piedmont,  and  the  mak- 
ing of  the  Kingdom  of,  216; 
Cavour,  216-239;  Piedmont  joins 
England  and  France  in  a  war 
against  Russia  in  the  Crimea, 
219;  the  Congress  of  Paris  dis- 
cusses the  question  of,  220;  cam- 
paign of  1859  in,  225,  389;  bat- 
tles of  Magenta  .  and  Solferino, 
225;  Peace  of  Villafranca,  225; 
situation  in  Central,  228;  Eng- 
land's participation  in  affairs 
in,  229;  Modena,  Parma,  Tus- 
cany, and  the  Romagna  added 
to  the  Kingdom  of  Piedmont, 
230;  cession  of  Savoy  and 
Nice  to  France  (1860),  231; 
Sicily  and  Naples  conquered  by 
Garibaldi  in  the  name  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  II,  234-235;  Pied- 
montese  troops  enter  the 
Marches  and  Umbria,  236;  an- 
nexation of  the  Kingdom  of 
Naples  and  of  Umbria  and  the 
Marches  to  Piedmont,  236;  all, 
excepting  Rome  and  Venice, 
united  under  Victor  Emmanuel 
II  (1861),  237;  Bismarck's 
treaty  of  alliance  with,  261 ;  and 
the  war  of  1866,  263;  battle 
of  Custozza  (1866),  265;  Venetia 
ceded  to  (1866),  267,  376;  neu- 
trality of,  in  Franco-German 
War,  294;  takes  possession  of 
Rome  (1870),  301;  completion  of 
unification  of,  301;  Kingdom 
of,  376-387 ;  difficulties  confront- 
ing the  new  kingdom  of,  376;  the 


Italy,  continued 
constitution  of,  377;  and  the 
question  of  the  Papacy,  378; 
Law  of  Papal  Guarantees,  378; 
the  Curia  Romana,  379;  financial 
status  of,  380;  death  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  II  (1878)  and  ac- 
cession of  his  son  Humbert  I, 
380;  the  educational  problem  in, 
380;  compulsory  education  laws, 
1877  and  1904  in,  381;  exten- 
sion of  the  suffrage  (1882)  in, 
381;  and  the  Triple  AlHance 
(1882),  321,  382;  Depretis  Min- 
istry, 382;  Crispi  ministries,  362- 
383;  colonial  policy,  382;  eco- 
nomic distress,  383;  riots  of 
(1889)  in,  383;  policy  of  repres- 
sion, 383,  and  the  war  with 
Abyssinia  (1896),  383;  Rudini 
Ministry,  383;  riots  of  May 
(1898) 'in,  383;  assassination  of 
Humbert  I  (1900),  384;  acces- 
sion and  character  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  HI,  384;  increasing 
prosperity  of,  384-387;  emigra- 
tion from,  to  South  America  and 
the  United  States,  386;  growth 
of,  546;  acquisitions  of,  in  Africa 
(1884-1890),  554;  at  the  Con- 
ference of  the  Powers  (1876), 
554;  at  the  Berlin  Conference 
(1884-1885),  555;  attitude  of, 
toward  the  breaches  of  the  Ber- 
lin Treaty  of  1878,  629,  640 

Ito,   Count,   694 

Jahn,  persecution  of,  43;  released, 
150 

Jamaica,  slavery  abolished  in 
(1833),  442;  English  possession, 
519 

Jameson,  Dr.,  542 

Janina,   Ali   of,   602 

Japan,  the  country  and  its  civiliza- 
tion, 687-688;  the  government  of, 
688-689;  advent  of  Europeans 
in,  689;  adopts  policy  of  isola- 
tion, 690;  treaty  with 'the  United 
States  (1854),' 69\;  abolition  of 
the  Shogunate  in,  692;  trans- 
formation of,  692;  abolition  of 
the  old  regime  (1871),  693; 
adopts  European  institutions, 
693-694;  becomes  a  constitu- 
tional state,  694;  drives  the 
Chinese  from  Korea  (1894)  and 
invades  Manchuria,  695;  Treaty 


INDEX 


803 


Japan,  continued 
of  Shimonoseki  (1895),  695-696; 
intervention  of  Russia,  France, 
and  Germany,  696;  relinquishes 
Port  Arthur  and  the  Liao-tung 
peninsula,  696;  helps  to  rescue 
the  legations  in  Peking,  698; 
Anglo-Japanese  Treaty  of  11)02, 
700;  makes  war  upon  Russia 
(190Jf-i905),  701-702;  Port  Ar- 
thur surrenders  to,  702;  cap- 
tures Mukden,  702;  destroys 
Russian  fleet,  703;  signs  Treaty 
of  Portsmouth  (1905),  702-703; 
and  Korea,  703  note 

Java,  581 

Jeffrey,  Francis,  on  the  steam 
engine,   408 

Jellachich,  appointed  governor  of 
Croatia,  177;  begins  civil  war, 
178;  given  command  of  all  the 
Austrian  troops  in  Hungary, 
178;  victories  of,  179 

Jena,  Students  of,  and  the  Bur- 
schenschaft,    39 

Jesuits,  in  Spain,  47;  in  Piedmont, 
54;  in  France,  86;  in  Germany, 
306;  expelled  from  Germany, 
308;  expelled  from  France 
(1880),  353;  suppressed  in 
Spain,  569;  expelled  from  Swit- 
zerland,  586 

Jews,  admitted  to  the  House  of 
Commons,  458;  persecution  of, 
in   Russia,  672 

Johannesburg,  541 

John  VI,  King  of  Portugal,  flees 
to  Brazil,  1807,  575;  returns  to 
Portugal  and  accepts  the  Consti- 
tution of  1822,  576;  death  of, 
1826,  576 

Joseph,  brother  of  Napoleon  I, 
45,  574 

Joseph   II,   of  Austria,   24 

Josephine,  Empress,  90,   127 

Juarez,  President  of  Mexico,  277, 
279 

July  Monarchy,  114-144.  See 
Louis  Philippe 

July  Ordinances  (1830),  92;  with- 
drawn, 96 

July  Revolution  of  1830,  95;  wide- 
spread influence  of,  100;  in  Bel- 
gium, 103-104;  in  Poland,  108; 
in    Italy,    110;   in   Germany,   112 

June   Days    (18^8,  France),   194 

Jutland,  Frederick  VI  grants  a 
consultative     assembly    to,    592; 


Jutland,  continued 

Frederick   VII   grants   a  consti- 
tution (18Jf9)  to,  593 


Kagoshima,  691 

Kamerun,  German  colony  in  Af- 
rica, 319 

Kara  George,  revolt  of  the  Ser- 
vians under  180i,  604;  murder 
of,  1817,  604;  House  of,  633 

Kars,  626 

Kent,  Duke  of,  father  of  Queen 
Victoria,   445 

Khartoum,  561-562 

Kiauchau,  697 

Kiel,  259;  Treaty  of  (181-i),  592, 
598 

Kioto,  688;  Mikado  leaves,  692; 
University  established   at,   693 

Kissingen,  battle  of,  265 

Kitchener,  Lord,  in  the  South  Af- 
rican War  (1899-1902),  543-544; 
recovers  the  Soudan,  1896-1898, 
562 

Koniggratz,  or  Sadowa,  battle  of, 
between  Prussia  and  Austria 
(1866),  265;  importance  of,  to 
France,  288 

Koraes,  edits  the  Greek  classics, 
605 

Korea,  and  the  Chino-Japanese 
War  (189J,),  695;  China  recog- 
nizes the  complete  independence 
of,  696;  Japan's  apprehension 
concerning,  699;  the  Anglo- Jap- 
anese Treaty  ot  1902  and,  700; 
Japanese  armies  enter,  701; 
Russo-Japanese  War  in  (1904- 
1905),  701-702;  by  the  Treaty 
of  Portsmouth  (1905)  Russia 
recognizes  Japan's  paramount 
interests  in,  702;  Japan  and, 
703  note 

Kossuth,  Francis,  son  of  Louis 
Kossuth,  and  his  party,  404 

Kossuth,  Louis,  leader  of  the  lib- 
eral party  in  Hungary,  157; 
speech  in  "the  Diet  (1848),  169; 
comes  into  power,  178;  appoint- 
ed President  of  Hungary,  179; 
resigns  in  favor  of  Gorgei,  180; 
flees  to  Turkey,  180 

Kotzebue,  murder  of,  40,  649 

Kruger,  Paul,  538 

Krupp,  Alfred,  244 

Kulturkampf,  306-309 

Kuropatkin,  General,  701 


80J< 


INDEX 


Labourdonnaye,  Minister  of  the  In- 
terior, 90 

Ladrone  Islands,  purchased  by 
Germany  from  Spain  (1899), 
319 

Lafayette,  elected  to  the  Chamber 
of  Deputies,  78;  a  leader  of  the 
Republicans  in  the  July  Revolu- 
tion (1830),  97,  123;  arid  the  pro- 
gressive party,  119;  and  the 
Greek  War  of  Indejiendence, 
608 

Laffitte,  and  the  progressive  party 
in   France,   119,   130 

Laharpe,  Colonel,  tutor  of  Alex- 
ander I  of  Russia,  646 

Laibach,  Congress  of  (18,21),  60 

La  Marmora,   General,  2-22 

Lamarque,  General,  133 

Lamartine,  129,  136;  emergence  of, 
141;  leader  of  the  Repub- 
licans in  the  Provisional  Govern- 
ment, 143,  188;  on  the  question 
of  the  flag,  190;  head  of  the 
executive  of  the  National  Con- 
stituent Assembly,  193;  on  the 
mode  of  electing  the  president, 
197;  candidate  for  the  presi- 
dency of  the  Republic,  200 

Lancashire,  boroughs  of,  433; 
gain  in  House  of  Commons  by 
Redistribution  Act  of  18S5,  494 

Land  Acts  (Ireland),  1870,  475- 
477;  failure  of,  490;  1881,  491, 
499;  proposed  1886,  501,  505; 
1891,  505-506;  1896,  512;  1903, 
506 

Land   Court    (Ireland),  491 

Landesgemeinde  cantons,  588 

Langensalza,  battle  of,  Han- 
overians defeat  the  Prussians  at, 
264 

LassaJle,  Ferdinand,  foimds  the 
Socialist  party  in  Germany, 
312;  founds  a  journal,  the  So- 
cial Democrat  (1865),  312; 
reading  of  his  works  prohibited, 
314 

Lateran,  379 

Lauenburg,  Denmark  renounces 
all  rights  to,  259;  bought  by 
Prussia,   260 

Law  of  Associations, i9W  (France), 
366 

Law  of  Papal  Guarantees  (1871), 
378 

Leboeuf,  Marshal  (Minister  of 
War),  295 


Ledru-Rollin,  Socialist  candidate 
for  the  presidency  of  the  Sec- 
ond Republic,  200 

Leeds,  unrepresented  in  Parlia- 
ment  (1815),  414 

Legations,  The,  223 

Legitimacy,  Principle  of,  at  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  5-6;  disregard- 
ed, 11 

Legitimists    (France),   122 

Legnago,  173 

Leipsic,  retained  by  King  of  Sax- 
ony at  Congress  of  Vienna,  8; 
celebration  of  anniversarj^  of, 
at  Wartburg,  39;  battle  of,  com- 
pared with  Koniggratz,  265 

Leo  XIII,  Pope,  1878-1903,  elec- 
tion of,  309,  380;  advises  con- 
ciliatory policy  toward  the  Third 
Republic  (France),  1893,  357, 
368;  attitude  toward  the  Law 
of  Papal  Guarantees  (1871), 
379 

Leopold  of  Coburg,  elected  King 
of  Belgium,  104.  See  Leopold 
I,   King  of  Belgium 

Leopold,  Prince  of  HohenzoUern- 
Sigmaringen,  candidacy  of,  for 
the  throne  of  Spain,  1869-1870, 
290,  570,  withdrawn,  391,  570 

Leopold  I,  King  of  Belgium,  1831- 
1865,  279;  and  the  political 
education  of  Queen  Victoria, 
445;    reign   of,   581-582 

Leopold  II,  King  of  Belgium, 
1865-1909,  and  the  Congo  Free 
State,  554-557;  calls  a  confer- 
ence of  the  Powers,  1876,  554; 
Congress  of  Berlin,  188^-1885, 
555;  criticism  of  his  aclminis- 
tration,  556;  death  of,  582 

Lesseps,  Ferdinand  de,  and  the 
Suez  Canal,  558 

Letter  Patent  of  February,  18^7 
(Prussia),  151 

Liao-tung  peninsula,  Japan  occu- 
pies, 695;  China  cedes,  to  Japan 
(1895),  696;  Japan  relinquishes, 
696;  the  Japanese  invade,  701; 
Russia  transfers,  to  Japan 
(1905),  703 

Liao-yang,  battle  of,  702 

Liebknecht,  Socialist  leader,  313 

Liechtenstein,  30 

Lin,  Chinese  Viceroy,  and  the 
Opium  War   (18J,0-18-'f2),  685 

Lissa,  Italian  fleet  defeated  by 
the  Austrian   (1866 J,  265 


INDEX 


805 


Literature,  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
turj^  719 

Lithuanian  provinces,  Poland  and, 
663;  persecution  of  the  Jews  in, 
672 

Liverpool,  465;  gain  in  House  of 
Commons  by  Redistribution  Act 
of  1SS5,  494;  and  the  problem 
of  transportation,  723,  725 

Liverpool,  Lord,  and  the  Six  Acts, 
422 

Livingstone,  David,  1813-1873,  Af- 
rican explorations  of,  552-553 

Livonia,   645 

Lombardo-Venetian  Kingdom  ac- 
quired by  Austria  at  Congress  of 
Vienna,  8,  23,  52-53;  govern- 
ment of,  53-54;  revolution  in, 
172,  388;  reaction  in,  after  18-',S, 
215;  agreement  at  Plombieres 
concerning,  223;  Austria  loses 
(1859-1866),  404 

Lombardy,  acquired  by  Austria  at 
Congress  of  Vienna,  9;  revolu- 
tion in,  172;  Austria  recovers, 
176;  reaction  in,  after  18.'i8, 
215;  war  in  (1859),  225;  Sar- 
dinia receives,  by  the  Peace 
of  Villafranca,  226;  illiteracy 
in  (1861),  381;  Austria  loses, 
389 

London,  Conferences  of  the 
Powers  in  (1830-1831),  recog- 
nize the  Kingdom  of  Belgium, 
105;  Conference  (18!,0),  Eng- 
land, Russia,  Austria,  and  Prus- 
sia make  a  treaty  with  Turkey, 
132;  Protocol  (1852)  concerning 
S  c  h  1  e  s  w  i  g-Holstein,  257-258 ; 
Conference  (186-i)  unsuccessful, 
258;  gain  of,  bv  Redistribu- 
tion Act  of  1885,  494;  jour- 
nals of,  oppose  Irish  Home 
Rule,  504;  Gladstonian  vote  in 
(1886),  504;  the  Old  Age  Pen- 
sions Law  in  the  County  of, 
516;  Convention  of  (1884), 
540;  Colonial  Conferences  in, 
548;   Treaty  of   (1827),  609 

London  Standard,  419 

London  Telegraph,  October  28, 
1908,  interview  with  Emperor 
William  H,  327 

London  Times,  on  cause  of  the 
Prussian  victory  at  Konig- 
grjitz,  266;  on  the  Dreyfus  Case, 
362 

Lonsdale,   Lord,  413 


Lorraine,  Germans  invade,  296; 
large  part  of,  ceded  to  Ger- 
many by  Treaties  of  Versailles 
and  Frankfort,  300;  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  303;  loss  of,  by 
France,,  337 

Loubet,  Emile,  President  of  the 
French  Republic  (1899-1906), 
361;  pardons  Dreyfus,  362;  visits 
Victor  Emmanuel  HI  (1904), 
368 

Louis  Napoleon  (^King  of  Hol- 
land),   110,   127 

Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte  (Na- 
poleon III)  (son  of  Louis  Na- 
poleon), 127-128;  Boulogne  fiasco, 
129 ;  favors  the  restoration  of  the 
Pope,  182;  opportunity  of,  198; 
his  previous  career,  199;  elected 
a  member  of  the  Constituent 
Assembly,  199;  a  candidate  for 
the  presidency,  199;  causes  of 
his  triumph,  200;  elected  presi- 
dent, December  10,  1848,  200; 
combines  with  the  Legislative  As- 
sembly to  '^rush  the  Republi- 
cans, 201-202;  demands  the  re- 
vision of  the  Constitution  in 
order  to  prolong  his  Presidency, 
203;  Assembly  votes  against  re- 
vision of  the  Constitution,  203; 
prepares  for  a  coup  d'etat,  203; 
demands  from  Assembly  the  re- 
peal of  the  Franchise  Law  of 
1850,  203;  coup  d'etat  of  Decem- 
ber 2,  1851,  204;  his  proclama- 
tions, 204;  appeals  to  the  people, 
205;  proclaimed  Emperor,  De- 
cember 2,  1852,  205-206;  char- 
acter of,  206;  his  programme, 
207;  his  powers,  208-209;  his 
marriage,  210;  his  activities, 
211;  general  prosperity  under, 
212;  with  England  and  Pied- 
mont wages  war  against  Russia 
in  the  Crimea,  212;  Congress  of 
Paris  (1856),  212;  birth  of  an 
heir,  212;  his  policy  of  peace, 
213;  Cavour  and,  220-227;  his 
interest  in  Italy,  222;  interview 
at  Plombieres,  222;  commands  his 
army  in  Italian  campaign,  225; 
interview  with  the  Emperor 
Francis  Joseph  I  at  Villafranca, 
225;  reasons  for  his  action,  226; 
bargain  with  Cavour,  230;  an- 
nexes Savoy  and  Nice,  231;  re- 
sentment   of    England    toward. 


806 


INDEX 


Louis  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  con- 
tinued 

231,  274;  approves  of  the  in- 
vasion of  the  Papal  States  by 
the  Piedmontese,  236;  methods 
of,  copied  by  Frederick  William 
IV,  of  Prussia,  242-343;  dis- 
astrous effect  of  the  Italian  war 
upon,  272;  vacillation  of,  273; 
makes  secret  treaty  of  com- 
merce (1860)  with  England,  274; 
turns  to  the  Liberals,  275;  in- 
creases powers  of  Parliament,  275; 
and  the  Mexican  Expedition,  277, 
569;  overthrows  the  Mexican  Re- 
public, 278;  failure  of  the  ex- 
pedition, 279;  effects  of  the  fail- 
ure upon,  280;  grants  conces- 
sions to  liberalism,  280;  attacks 
upon,  282;  transformation  of  the 
Empire  completed  under,  283; 
unwise  adherence  to  his  doctrine 
of  nationalities,  285;  attitude  to- 
ward Schleswig-Holstein  affair 
(1864),  286;  meeting  at  Biar- 
ritz (1865),  260,  286;  fails  to 
use  his  opportunity  in  1866, 
287;  failure  of  diplomacy  of, 
288;  attitude  toward  the  candi- 
dacy of  Prince  Leopold  for  the 
Spanish  throne,  290;  fails  to 
secure  alliances  with  the  Powers, 
294;  surrenders  to  King  Wil- 
liam I  of  Prussia  at  Sedan 
(1870),  297;  growth  of  the  So- 
cialists under,  331-332;  and  the 
Third  Republic,  341;  conquests 
under,  373;  attitude  toward 
Russia  (185^),  613;  and  the 
Danubian  Principalities  (1859), 
618 

Louis  Philippe,  Duke  of  Orleans, 
King  of  the  French  (ISSO-IS^'/S), 
candidacy  of,  96;  made  Lieu- 
tenant-General  of  France,  96; 
proclaimed  King,  98;  recognized 
by  the  Powers,  100;  favors  elec- 
tion of  Leopold  of  Coburg  as 
King  of  Belgium,  104;  attitude 
toward  the  revolutionary  move- 
ments (1831)  in  Italy,  110; 
reign  of,  114-144;  career  of, 
114;  his  liberalism,  114;  his  legal 
title  to  the  throne,  115;  and  the 
revised  Constitution,  116;  the 
franchise  lowered  (1831),  117; 
character  of  the  July  Monarchy, 
117;    insecurity    of    the    regime. 


Louis  Philippe,  continued 

118;  the  progressive  and  con- 
servative parties  under,  119; 
popular  unrest,  120;  Casimir- 
P^rier  Ministry,  120-121;  and 
the  Legitimists,  122;  Republican 
insurrections  (1832),  123;  vigor- 
ous measures  of  the  government, 
124;  attempts  upon  the  life  of, 
125;  the  September  Laws 
(1835),  125-126;  and  the  Na- 
poleonic legend,  127-129;  per- 
sonal government  of,  131 ;  min- 
istry of  Thiers,  131-132;  minis- 
try of  Guizot,  133-142;  industrial 
revolution,  137;  growth  of  social- 
ism under,  138-139;  opposition  to 
the  policy  of  the  Government, 
139-142;  overthrow  of,  142-143; 
influence  of  his  fall  in  Central 
Europe,  169;  conquests  of,  373 

Louis  I,  King  of  Bavaria,  aids 
Greeks,  608;  son  of,  becomes 
King  of  Greece,  1833,  611 

Louis  I,  King  of  Portugal  (1861- 
1889),  577 

Louis  XV,  King  of  France,  loss  of 
colonial  empire  under,  371 

Louis  XVI,  King  of  France,  92, 114 

Louis  XVIII,  King  of  France, 
(lSl.'f-1824),  restored  to  the 
French  throne,  2;  and  the  First 
Treaty  of  Paris  (ISUf),  3;  and 
the  Second  Treaty  of  Paris 
(1815),  13;  and  Alexander  I,  16, 
647;  reign  of,  66-83;  and  the 
Constitutional  Charter  (1814), 
67-70;  character  of,  70;  difficul- 
ties of  his  situation,  71-75;  the 
White  Terror,  73;  prorogues  the 
Chamber,  74;  checks  the  Ultras, 
74;  and  the  Congress  of  Aix-la- 
Chapelle,  75;  sends  armv  into 
Spain  (1823),  82;  death  of,  82; 
character  of  his  reign,  98 

Louvel,  assassin  of  Duke  of  Berry, 
80 

Lovett,  Author  of  "  The  Rotten 
House  of  Commons,"  447 

Lowe,  Robert,  on  the  Reform  Bill 
of  1867,  464;  in  the  Gladstone 
Ministry   (1868),  465 

Lowell,  A.  L.,  on  the  franchise  in 
England,  495-496;  on  the  peo- 
ple of  India,  522 

Liibeck,  member  of  the  North  Ger- 
man Confederation,  268;  mem- 
ber of  the  German  Empire,  304 


INDEX 


807 


Lucca,  52 

Lucerne,  584 

Lucknow,   521 

Luxembourg  Palace,  Labor  Com- 
mission meets  at,  191 

Luxemburg,  member  of  the  Ger- 
man Confederation,  31 

Lyons,  Republican  insurrection  in 
(183-'/),  124;  insurrection  of 
workingmen  in,  138 

Lytton,  Lord,  Viceroy  of  India, 
522 

Maassen,  financial  reformer  of 
Prussia,    148 

Macaulay,  Thomas  Babington,  on 
the  First  Reform  Bill,  434;  on 
Gladstone,  466 

Macaulay,  Zachary,  and  the  anti- 
slavery  agitation,  440 

Macedonia,  and  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano,  1878,  624;  disposition 
of,  by  Congress  of  Berlin,  1878, 
625;  question  of,  627 

Mackintosh,  and  the  Penal  Code, 
424 

MacMahon,  Marshal,  defeated  in 
the  battle  of  Worth,  296;  chosen 
President  of  the  French  Repub- 
lic, 342;  establishment  of  the 
Septennate,  343;  struggle  with 
the  Chamber,  348-349;  his  con- 
ception of  the  presidency,  349; 
resigns,  351 ;  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  and  the  Republic  under, 
366 

Madagascar,  France  sends  expe- 
dition to,  353;  French  colony, 
374 

Madeira,  part  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Portugal,  578 

Madrid,  riots  in  (1820),  49;  the 
Congress  of  Verona  and  the 
Madrid  Government,  62-03;  the 
Christinos  control,  566 

Magenta,  battle  of,  225,  725 

Mahratta  Confederacy,  Overthrow 
of,  520 

Magyars,  position  of,  in  Hungary, 
24,  154,  176;  succeed  in  making 
Magj^ar  the  official  language  in 
Hungary  (184V,  157;  the 
Croatians  rise  against,  177-178; 
Francis  Joseph  I  and,  388;  Aus- 
gleich  satisfactory  to,  394;  op- 
pose the  demands  of  the  Czechs, 
398;  and  the  policy  of  Magyariza- 
tion,  403;  Francis  Kossuth,  lead- 


Magyars,   continued 

er  of  a  party  of,  404;  oppose 
the  "  occupation  "  of  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina,  405 

Mahdi,  leader  of  revolt  in  the 
Soudan,  561-562 

Mahmud  H,  Sultan,  refuses  the 
armistice  of  the  Treaty  of  Lon- 
don (1827),  609-610;  war  with 
Russia  (1828),  610;  signs  Treaty 
of  Adrianople  (1829),  611 

Majuba  Hill  (1881),  539 

MaJta,  retained  by  England  in 
1815,   9,   519 

Manchester,  unrepresented  in  Par- 
liament (1815),  414,  434-435; 
Anti-Corn-Law  League  founded 
at,  1839,  452;  and  the  problem 
of  transportation,  723,  725 

Manchuria,  invaded  by  the  Jap- 
anese, 695;  Russian  entrance 
into,  697;  Russian  activity  in, 
699;  Russo-Japanese  War  in, 
701-702;  disposition  of,  by 
Treaty  of  Portsmouth  (1905), 
703 

Manifesto  of  August  19,  1905 
(Russia),  710-711 

Manifesto  of  October  30,  1905 
(Russia),  712 

Manin,  Daniel,  Republican  leader 
in  Venice,  173;  on  Italy,  221 

Manitoba,  admitted  into  the  Do- 
minion  of  Canada,   1870,  529 

Manuel,  elected  to  the  French 
Chamber  of  Deputies,  78 

Manuel  II,  King  of  Portugal, 
1908—,  578 

March  Days  (1848),  Hungary, 
170,  174 

March  Laws  (Hungary),  1848, 
170-171,    177,    179 

Marches,  The,  235;  annexed  to 
Piedmont  (1860),  236 

Maria  Christina,  Queen  Regent  of 
Spain,  574 

Maria  da  Gloria  (Maria  II), 
Queen  of  Portugal,  1826-1828, 
1834-1853;  Civil  War  with  Dom 
Miguel,  577;  death  of,  577 

Marie,  Minister  of  Commerce,  192 

Marie  Louise,  wife  of  Napoleon  I, 
receives  Parma,  9;  forced  to  flee 
from  Parma,  110 

Maritime  Province,  acquired  by 
Russia  from  China  (1860),  682, 
687 

Maritza,  621 


808 


INDEX 


Marmont,  Commander  of  the 
troops   in   Paris    (18S0),  95 

Marrast,  in  the  Provisional  Gov- 
ernment, 188 

Marseilles,  uprisings  in,  73,  123 

Mars-la-Tours,  Germans  defeat 
French  at,  296 

Martignac  Ministry,  89 

Martinique,  French  possession, 
1815,  371 

Marx,  Karl,  and  Socialism  in  Ger- 
many, 312 

Massa,'  223 

Massawa,  seized  by  Italy  (1885), 
382 

Mauritius,  Slavery  in,  abolished 
by  England,  439-440;  Eng>lish 
possession  (1815),  519 

Maximilian,  Archduke  of  Austria, 
offered  the  imperial  crown  of 
Mexico,  278;  disastrous  outcome 
of  the  adventure,  279;  death  of, 
280 

May  Laws  (Prussia,  1813,  181},, 
1815),  308 

Mazzini,  Joseph  (1805-1812),  160- 
164;  early  life,  160;  his  intense 
patriotism,  161;  founder  of 
"Young  Italy,"  161;  methods 
and  aims  of  the  society,  162- 
163;  and  Pius  IX  concerning 
Italy,  167;  one  of  the  Triumvirs 
of  Rome,  181 ;  compared  with 
Cavour,  217,  219;  on  education, 
381 

Mecklenburg,  Government  of,  36; 
and  the  Zollverein,   149 

Mecklenburg-Schwerin,  in  the 
North  German  Confederation, 
269 

Mehemet  Ali,  Viceroy  of  Egypt, 
war  with  Turkey,  131 ;  founds  a 
semi-royal  house,  557-558,  602; 
Sultan  asks  aid  of,  against  the 
Greeks,    607 

Melbourne,  Lord,  in  the  Grey  Min- 
istry (1831),  430;  and  the  politi- 
cal education  of  Queen  Victoria, 
445;  fall  of  ministry  of  (1841), 
451 

Melikoff,  Loris,  669 

M^line,  Prime  Minister,  and  the 
Dreyfus  Case,  360 

Menelek,    ruler    of   Abj^ssinia,   383 

Metternich,  at  Congress  of  Vienna, 
4;  and  the  Austrian  policy,  9; 
and  the  Holy  Alliance,  15;  and 
the     Quadruple      Alliance,      18; 


Metternich,  continued 
characterization  and  historical 
importance  of,  20-23;  and  Fran- 
cis I,  25;  his  system  and  its 
application  in  other  countries, 
27-28,  35,  37-38,  58-64;  and  the 
German  universities  and  the 
press,  39-42;  conferences  at 
Carlsbad,  41-44;  doctrine  of  the 
right  of  intervention,  58-59;  and 
the  Congress  of  Aix-la-Chapelle, 
59;  his  principle  of  intervention 
accepted,  59;  triumph  of  his  sys- 
tem, 63;  his  system  checked,  65; 
opinion  of  the  Polignac  Min- 
istry of  Charles  X,  90;  and 
Charles  X,  92;  and  the  July 
Revolution  (1830),  100;  on  Italy, 
110;  intervention  of,  in  the 
Papal  States,  111;  supreme  in 
Germany,  113;  estimate  of  the 
July  Monarchy,  118-119,  145; 
control  of,  in  Austria  (1815- 
18-i8),  152;  and  Pius  IX,  166; 
overthrow  of,  170;  opinion  of 
Cavour,  221;  and  the  Greek  War 
of  Independence,  608;  Alex- 
ander  I   and,   649 

Metz,  296;  fall  of,  298 

Mexico,  48;  expedition  into,  277- 
279,  569 

Michel,  General,  295 

Miguel,  Dom,  King  of  Portugal, 
(1828-183-'f),  younger  son  of 
John  VI,  King  of  Portugal,  576; 
proclaimed  King,  1828,  577;  Ci%'il 
War  with  Maria  da  Gloria,  577; 
renounces  claims  to  throne 
(1834),  577 

Mikado  of  Japan,  688;  and  the 
Shogunate,  691-692;  recovers 
power,  692 

Milan,  insurrection  in,  172;  oc- 
cupied by  the  French  and 
Sardinians  (1859),  225;  riots  in 
(1889),3S3;    riots    in  (1898),  38S 

Milan,  King  of  Servia,  forced  to 
abdicate,  1889,  633 

Militarism,  spread  of,  728;  ex- 
pense of,   728-729 

Mill,  John  Stuart,  speech  in  favor 
of  suffrage  for  women,  464 

Milner,  Sir  Alfred,  Reports  on 
South  Africa,  1899,  542-543;  on 
the  rapid  growth  of  the  Egj'p- 
tian  debt,  558 

Milyoukov,  678 

Mines,  Labor  in.  Act  (1842),  455 


INDEX 


809 


Miquelon,  French  possession,  1815, 
371 

Mir,  government  of,  646;  cultiva- 
tion of  land  in,  655;  land  prob- 
lem in,  658;  transformation  of, 
19GD,  717 

Missolonghi,  siege  of  (1825-1826), 
and   fall  of,  607-608 

Modena,  Austrian  restoration  in, 
9,  52-53;  ruler  of,  forced  to 
flee,  110;  restoration  of  the 
Duke  of,  226;  annexed  to  Pied- 
mont  (1860),  230 

Mohammed  V,  Sultan  of  Turkey, 
1909—,  643 

Moldavia,  1815,  part  of  the  Otto- 
man Empire,  601 ;  part  of  Bes- 
sarabia ceded  to,  by  Treaty  of 
Paris  (1856),  615.  See  Dan- 
ubian    Principalities 

Mol^,  minister  of  Louis  Philippe, 
131,  133 

Molesworth,  on  qualifications  for 
suffrage    in    boroughs,   414    note 

Moltke,  Hellmuth  von,  Prussian 
General,  264;  plans  for  the  in- 
vasion of  Bohemia  in  the  war 
against  Austria  (1866),  265; 
superiority  of  the  armies  under, 
266 

Momrasen,  246 

Monaco,   52 

Moniteur,  The,  92 

Monroe  Doctrine,  64-65 

Montalembert,   199 

Montenegro,  Slavs  of,  aid  Her- 
zegovina, 1815,  620;  and  Servia 
declare  war  against  Turkey, 
1816,  622-623;  complete  inde- 
pendence of,  recognized  by  the 
Treaty  of  San  Stefano,  1818, 
624;  declared  independent  by 
Congress  of  Berlin,  1818,  625- 
626;  Servia  and,  641 

Monti  jo.  Mile.  Eugenie  de,  mar- 
ries Napoleon  III,  210.  See 
Empress  Eugenie 

Moral  and  Civil  Primacy  of  the 
Italians,"  "  The,  by  Gioberti,  164 

Moravia,  23;  position  in  the  Em- 
pire (1861),  390 

Morea,  605;  conquered,  607; 
French  army  in,  611 

Morley,  Lord,  on  the  labor  code, 
456;  on  the  secret  ballot,  483- 
484;  on  Irish  Home  Rule,  501, 
508;  on  relations  of  England 
and  the  Transvaal,  540 


Morocco,  551,  601 

Moscow,  population  of,  675;  stu- 
dents at  the  University  of,  678; 
students  in,  revolt,  709;  riots  in, 
712 

Mukden,  701 ;  captured  by  the  Jap- 
anese, 702 

Munich,  DoUinger  and  the  Univer- 
sity of,  307 

Municipal  Corporations  Act 
(18S5),  England,  444 

Murad   V,   621 

Murat,  King  of  Naples,  5,  51 

Music,  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
720 

Mutsuhito,  Emperor  of  Japan, 
1861 — ,  accession  of,  692;  grants 
a  constitution   (1889),  694 

Nanking,  Treaty  of  ^^8^2),  685 

Naples,  Kingdom  of  (Kingdom  of 
the  Two  Sicilies),  Murat,  King 
of  (ISl/f),  5,  51 ;  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  and,  52;  Ferdinand 
I,  King  of,  makes  a  treaty  with 
Austria,  53;  government  of,  55- 
56;  the  Carbonari,  56;  Revolu- 
tion of  1820  in,  57;  constitution 
granted,  57;  and  the  Congress  of 
Troppau  (1820),  59;  and  the 
Congress  of  Laibach  (1821), 
60;  Austria  invades  and  restores 
absolutism  in,  60-61 ;  revolution 
in  (1848),  167;  cooperates  in 
insurrection  against  Austria, 
173;  recalls  troops,  175-176;  ab- 
solutism restored  in,  181 ; 
reaction  in,  after  18.'f8,  215; 
agreement  at  Plombieres  con- 
cerning, 223;  conquest  of,  232- 
237;  Cavour's  policy  concerning, 
234;  Sicily  invaded  by  Garibaldi 
(1860),  234;  conquered,  235; 
flight  of  King  Francis  II,  235; 
annexed  to  Piedmont  (1860), 
236-237;  government  of  (1815- 
1860),  377;  illiteracy  in  (1861), 
381 

Napoleon,  Prince  Jerome,  be- 
trothed to  Princess  Clotilde,  223 

Napoleon  I,  Overthrow  of,  1 ; 
escapes  from  Elba  and  seizes  the 
government  of  France,  13;  the 
concert  of  Powers  and,  17;  on 
Italian  unity,  50;  significance  of 
his  activity  in  Italy,  51;  the 
second  funeral  of,  128;  the 
"  Napoleonic     Ideas "     by     Na- 


810 


INDEX 


Napoleon  I,  continued 
poleon  III,  206;  and  the  Con- 
cordat of  ISOl,  367;  and  Water- 
loo, 418;  and  Switzerland,  585; 
Alexander  I  of  Russia  and,  646; 
flight  of,  from  Russia,  722 

Napoleon  III.  See  Louis  Na- 
poleon  Bonaparte 

"Napoleonic  Ideas,"  by  Napoleon 
III,  206 

Nassau,  40;  supports  Austria  in 
the  war  of  1866,  263;  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Kingdom  of  Prus- 
sia, 267 

Natal,  responsible  government 
granted  to  (1S93),  528;  Boers 
migrate  into,  537;  made  a  colony 
of  England  fl8-i3),  538;  posi- 
tion of,  in  the  Union  of  South 
Africa    (1909),    544-545 

National,   The,   143 

National  Constituent  Assembly 
(IS-iS),   France,   193 

National  Defense  (France,  1870), 
Government  of,  298-300 

National  Workshops  (France), 
191-193;   abolished,   194 

Navarino,  battle  of,  1827,  610 

Navigation,  steam,  723-724 

Navigation  Laws  (England),  450; 
Huskisson's  reforms  of,  1823- 
1825,  451;  aboUshed  (1849j,4:oi- 
455 

Nemours,  Duke  of,  son  of  Louis 
Philippe,    131 

Netherlands,  The.  See  Holland 
and    Belgium 

New  Brunswick,  English  pos- 
session (1815),  519,  523;  re- 
sponsible government  granted 
to  (1848),  527;  becomes  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Dominion  of  Canada 
(1867),   528 

New  Caledonia,  336 

Newcastle,  724 

Newcomen,  steam-engine  made  by 
(1705),  407 

Newfoundland,  371 ;  English  pos- 
session (1815),  519,  523;  re- 
sponsible government  granted  to, 
527;  and  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada,   529 

New  Guinea,  part  of,  owned  by 
Germany,  319 

New  Holland,  531 

New  South  Wales,  responsible  gov- 
ernment granted  to,  527;  Captain 
Cook's    voyage    to,    531;    in   the 


New   South   Wales,   continued 
Australian   Commonwealth,   532; 
New     Zealand     separated     from 
(1865),  534 

New  York  Herald,  and  the  Stan- 
ley expedition,  553 

New  Zealand,  Tasman's  discovery 
of,  531;  annexed  to  the  British 
Empire,  1839,  534;  given  re- 
sponsible government,  1854,  527, 
534;  made  a  separate  colony, 
1865,  534;  becomes  Dominion  of, 
(1907),  534;  advanced  social 
legislation,  535;  system  of  taxa- 
tion, 535;  industrial  legislation, 
535;  Old  Age  Pension  Law 
(1898  and  1905),  536;  woman 
suffrage  in,  536;  autonomy  in, 
546,  549 

Nice,  223;  annexed  to  France,  231 

Nicholas  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  1825- 
1855,  108;  aids  Francis  Joseph  I 
of  Austria  against  Hungary,  180, 
654;  intervenes  in  the  Greek  War 
of  Independence,  609;  ambitions 
of,  611-612;  attitude  of  Na- 
poleon III  toward,  613;  reign 
of,  650-655;  accession  and  train- 
ing, 650;  system  of  repression 
by  police  and  censorship,  651- 
652;  literature  under,  652-653; 
abolishes  capital  punishment  ex- 
cept for  treason,  653;  on  serf- 
dom, 653;  foreign  policy  of, 
653-654;  the  Crimean  '  War 
(1854-1855),  and  the  humiliation 
of    Russia,    654;    death    of,    615, 

Nicholas  II,  Tsar  of  Russia, 
1894 — »  accession  and  policy  of 
repression,  676;  increasing  dis- 
affection under,  677;  condition 
of  the  peasantry,  677;  persecu- 
tion of  the  "intellectuals,"  678; 
and  Finland,  678-680;  abrogates 
the  Finnish  constitution,  679;  on 
the  possession  of  the  Liao-tung 
peninsula  by  the  Japanese,  696; 
enters  upon  a  more  liberal 
policy,  708;  demands  of  the 
liberals  not  granted  by,  709;  is- 
sues the  Manifesto  of  August 
19,  1905,  710;  and  the  Manifesto 
of  October  30,  1905,  712;  and 
a  decree  constituting  the  Coun- 
cil of  the  Empire,  713;  the  "or- 
ganic laws  "  issued  in  the  name 
of,    713  J    and   the   First   Duma, 


INDEX 


811 


Nicholas  II,  continued 

713-715;  and  the  Second  Duma, 
715-71G;  alters  the  electoral  sys- 
tem, 716;  and  the  Third  Duma, 
71(5;  and  the  transformation  of 
the  mir,  717;  restores  the  liber- 
ties of  Finland,  717-718;  on  the 
limitation  of  armaments  (1S9S), 
729;  and  the  First  Peace  Con- 
ference at  the  Hague  (1899), 
730-733;  and  the  Second  Peace 
Conference  at  the  Hague 
(1907J,  734 

Niebuhr,  on  the  Papal  States,  55 

Nihilism,  Rise  of,  666;  Stepniak 
and  Turgenieff  on,  666;  persecu- 
tion of  the  Nihilists,  667;  be- 
comes socialistic,  667;  propa- 
ganda of,  667;  policy  of  ter- 
rorism, 668-669 

Nikolsburg,  Preliminary  Peace  of, 
263,  267 

Nile,  sources  of,  discovered,  552 

Ningpo,  opened  to  British  trade 
by  Treaty  of  Nanking  (1842), 
685 

Nippon,  688 

Nogi,  General,  conducts  the  siege 
of  Port   Arthur,   701 

Nomination  boroughs  (England, 
1815),  413 

Normandy,  German  troops  with- 
drawn  from,  338 

North  America,  English  posses- 
sions in  (1815),  519;  British, 
523-530 

North  German  Confederation, 
composition  of,  268;  government 
of  (1867),  269,  303;  alliance 
with  the  South  German  States, 
270-271 

North  German  Lloj'^d  steamship 
line,  established  (1857),  724 

Norway,  joined  with  Sweden,  10, 
592;  Constitution  of  Eidsvold 
(1814),  595,  598;  war  with 
Sweden,  595-596;  Union  with 
Sweden,  596;  rulers  (1S15- 
1905),  596-597;  constitution  of 
1866,  597;  friction  with  Sweden, 
597-598;  abolition  of  the  Nor- 
wegian nobility,  599;  dissolution 
of  the  Union  with  Sweden  and 
Treaty  of  Carlstad  (1905),  599- 
600;  chooses  Prince  Charles  of 
Denmark,  who  becomes  Haakon 
VII  (1905),  600;  suflFrage  in, 
600 


Novara,  battle  of  (18^9),  62,  181, 
215 

Nova  Scotia,  English  possession 
(1815),  519,  523;  responsible 
government  granted  to  (1848), 
527;  becomes  a  member  of  the 
Dominion  of  Canada  (1867), 
528 

Nyassa,  Lake,  552 

Obrenovitch,  Milosch,  becomes 
"  Hereditary  Prince  of  the 
Servians"  (1830),  604;  House 
of,  633 

Obstruction,  adoption  of  the  policy 
of,   by   Irish   Home   Rulers,   498 

O'Connell,  Daniel,  founds  the 
Catholic  Association  in  Ireland, 
427;  elected  to  Parliament,  427; 
and  the   Irish  party,   469,  498 

O'Connor,  Feargus,  and  the  Chart- 
ist movement,  448 

Okhotsk,  681 

Oku,   General,  at  Mukden,  701 

Old  Age,  Insurance  Law  (1889), 
Germany,  316;  Pensions  Act 
(1908),  Great  Britain,  515-516; 
Pension  Law,  New  Zealand  (1898 
and  1905),  536;  Denmark 
(1891),  594 

Old  Catholics,  307-308 

Old   Sarum,  413,  432 

Ollivier,  leader  of  the  Third  Party, 
282;  becomes  head  of  the  minis- 
try, 283;  and  the  HohenzoUern 
candidacy,  291,  293 

Olmiitz,  flight  of  the  Emperor  to, 
178,  248,  388;  Bismarck  on  the 
Convention  of,  252-253 

Omdurman,  battle  of,  1898,  562 

Ontario,  527,  528,  and  see  Canada 

Opium  War,  1840-18J,2,  685 

Orange  Free  State,  founded  by 
Boers  from  Cape  Colony,  538; 
annexed  to  the  British  Empire 
(1848),  538;  England  renounces 
sovereignty  over  (1852),  538; 
and  the  South  African  War, 
1899-1902,  543-544;  annexed  to 
the  British  Empire  (1902),  544; 
responsible  government  granted 
to  (1907),  528,  544;  position  in 
the  Union  of  South  Africa,  544- 
545 

Ordinances  of  July  (1830),  92- 
93;  withdrawn,  96 

Oregon,  settlement  of  the  Oregob 
dispute,  1846,  529 


812 


INDEX 


"Organic  Laws,"  The  (Russia), 
713 

Orleans,  Duchess  of,  143 

Orleans,  Duke  of,  91.  See  also 
Louis   Philippe 

Orsini,    conspiracy    of,    232 

Oscar  I,  King  of  Norway  and 
Sweden,  1SU-1S59,  597 

Oscar  II,  King  of  Nonvay  and 
Sweden,  1872-1905;  Kiiig  of 
Sweden  alone,  1905-1901;  fric- 
tion between  Norway  and  Swe- 
den, 597-598;  question  of  the 
consular  service  (1892),  599; 
dissolution  of  the  union  of 
Sweden  and  Norway  and  Treaty 
of  Carlstad,  599-600;  death  of 
(1901),  600 

Osman  Pasha,  fortifies  Plevna, 
623;    surrenders,    624 

Ottawa,  federal  parliament  at, 
528 

Otto  I,  King  of  Greece,  1833- 
1862,  611;  reign  of,  633;  be- 
comes a  constitutional  monarch, 
ISU,  634;  overthrow  of,  1862, 
634 

Ottoman  Empire,  The  Disruption 
of,  and  the  Rise  of  the  Balkan 
States,   601-644.     See   Turkey 

Oudh,  Annexation  of,  to  the  Brit- 
ish Empire,  520 

Owen,  Robert,  and  the  child  labor 
agitation,   442 

Oxford  University,  Religious  tests 
in,  415;  Gladstone  at,  465-466; 
religious  tests  in,  abolished,  483, 
485 

Pact    of   1815    (Switzerland),    584 
Palacky,  historian,   154 
Palmerston,  Lord,  attitude  toward 
Italian    unity,    229;    estimate    of 
Cavour,  239;  in  the  Grey  Minis- 
try-,   430;     attitude    toward    the 
extension    of   the    suffrage,   461; 
death  of,  461;  on  the  secret  bal- 
lot,   483;     attitude    toward    the 
Crimean  War,  613 
Papal  Guarantees,   Law  of,  378 
Papal  Infallibility,  Dogma  of,  307 
Papal    States,    restoration    of,    by 
Congress    of    Vienna,    9-10,    52; 
government   of,   55;   insurrection 
in    (1831  J,    110;   Austrian   inter- 
vention,   111;    French    seize    An- 
cona.    111;    absolutism    restored, 
111;  results  of  the  insurrections. 


Papal   States,    continued 

111-112;  cooperate  in  insurrec- 
tion against  Austria  (18.'fS- 
1849),  173;  recall  troops,  175; 
agreement  at  Plombieres  con- 
cerning, 223.     See  Rome 

Paris,  First  Treaty  of  (ISlj), 
3,  5;  the  "Hundred  Days"  in, 
13;  Second  Treaty  of  '(1815), 
13;  oppositon  of  the  liberal  edi- 
tors of  (1830),  94;  July  Revolu- 
tion (1830)  in,  95,  117;  Louis 
Philippe  in,  114,  125;  Republican 
insurrection  in  (1832),  123; 
revolution  of  February  (18-'/8), 
141-142;  proclamation  of  the  Sec- 
ond Republic  in,  144;  political 
life  in  (18-'i8),  190;  and  the  Na- 
tional Workshops,  192-193;  the 
June  Days  (1848),  in,  194;  de- 
clared under  martial  law,  202; 
Louis  Napoleon's  coup  d'etat  of 
December  2,  1851,  in,  203-204; 
the  "  massacre  of  the  boule- 
vards," 205;  international  exposi- 
tion in  (1855),  211-212;  im- 
provements in,  212;  Congress  of 
(1856),  212,  220;  excitement  in, 
over  the  news  of  the  candidacy 
of  Prince  Leopold,  291;  war 
party  in  (1810),  293;  proclama- 
tion of  the  Third  Republic 
(1810),  297;  siege  of,  298-299; 
capitulation  of,  299;  and  the 
Commune,  330-336;  and  the  As- 
sembly, 330;  distress  of  the  work- 
ing classes  in,  331;  revolutionary 
elements  in,  331-332;  action  of 
the  National  Guard  in,  332;  war 
between  the  Commune  and  the 
Versailles  Government,  333;  gov- 
ernment of  the  Commune,  333; 
the  Commune  and  National  As- 
sembly clash,  334;  second  siege 
of,  334-335;  Government's  pun- 
ishment of,  335;  seat  of  govern- 
ment transferred  to  (1880),  352; 
and  the  Boulanger  crisis,  356; 
Exposition  of  1889  in,  357; 
Treaty  of,  1898,  Spain  and  the 
United  States,  574;  Treaty  of 
(1856),  615-616;  Conference  of 
(1858),  618 

Paris,  Count  of,  grandson  of 
Louis  Philippe,  143;  Orleanist 
Pretender,  341-342 

Parish  CouncUs  Bill  of  1894  (Eng- 
land), 509 


INDEX 


813 


Parliaments,  Modern,  Australia, 
Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives (1901),  534;  Austria, 
House  of  Lords  and  House  of 
Representatives  (1861),  395; 
Hungary,  Table  of  Magnates 
and  Table  of  Deputies  (18),8), 
395;  Austria-Hungary,  The  Dele- 
gations (1867),  394.;  Belgium, 
Two  Chambers  (1831),  581;  Bul- 
garia, Sobranje  (1879),  628; 
Canada,  Dominion  of,  Senate  and 
House  of  Commons  (1867),  529; 
Crete,  Assembly  (1907),  635 
note;  Denmark,  Landsthing  and 
Folkething  (1866),  594;  Fin- 
land, Single  Chamber  (200), 
Grand  Committee  (60),  1906, 
718;  France,  Senate  and  Cham- 
ber of  Deputies  (1875)  ,  345- 
346;  Germany,  Bundesrath  and 
Reichstag  (1871),  304;  Great 
Britain,  House  of  Lords  and 
House  of  Commons,  410,  437- 
438,  493-496  (1885);  Greece, 
Boul6  (1864),  634;  Holland, 
States  General,  Upper  and 
Lower  Houses  (1848),  580;  Ice- 
land (1874),  595;  Italy,  Senate 
and  Chamber  of  Deputies 
(1861),  377-378;  Japan,  House 
of  Peers  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives (1889),  694;  New 
Zealand,  534;  Norway,  Storthing 
(1814),  595;  Portugal,  577-578; 
Prussia,  House  of  Peers  and 
House  of  Representatives 
(1850),  186;  Roumania,  Two 
Chambers  (1S81),  632;  Russia, 
Council  of  the  Empire  and 
Duma  (1906),  713;  Spain,  Sen- 
ate and  Congress  of  Deputies 
(1876),  573;  Sweden,  Upper  and 
Lower  Houses  (1866),  597,  600; 
Switzerland,  Council  of  States 
and  National  Council  (1848), 
586;  Turkey,  Senate  and  Cham- 
ber of  Deputies  (1908),  642; 
Union  of  South  Africa,  Senate 
and  House  of  Assembly  (1909), 
544-545 

Parma,  Duchy  of,  disposition  of, 
by  Congress  of  Vienna,  9,  52- 
53;  Marie  Louise,  Duchess  of, 
forced  to  flee  from,  110,  226; 
annexed  to  Piedmont  (1860),  230 

Parnell,  Charles  Stuart,  leader  of 
the  Home  Rulers,  498 


Patrimony  of  St.  Peter,  238 

Peace  Conferences  at  the  Hague, 
First  (1899),  730-733,  estab- 
lishes Permanent  Court  of  Arbi- 
tration, 733;  Second  (1907), 
734-735;  significance  of,  735 

Pedro  I  of  Brazil,  becomes  Pedro 
IV  of  Portugal,  576;  abdicates 
in  favor  of  his  daughter,  Maria 
da  Gloria,  576-577 

Pedro  V,  King  of  Portugal,  1853- 
1861,  577 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  reforms  Penal 
Code  (1823),  424;  and  the 
Catholic  Emancipation  Act,  427- 
428;  on  the  Reform  Bill,  434- 
435;  on  Queen  Victoria,  445; 
leader  of  the  Conservatives,  be- 
comes Prime  Minister  (1841- 
1846),  451-452;  reforms  the 
tariff  (1842),  452;  repeal  of  the 
Corn  Laws  (1846),  454;  over- 
throw of,  454;  and  Gladstone, 
466 

Peking,  684;  threatened  (1858), 
686-687;  legations  in  (1900), 
rescued  by  the  Powers,  698; 
Empress-Dowager  returns  to, 
704 

Penal  Code,  reformed  (1823)  by 
Sir  Robert  Peel,  424 

Perry,  Commodore,  sent  by  United 
States  to  Japan,  690,  693;  the 
Shogun  makes  a  treaty  with 
(1854),  691 

Pescadores  Islands,  China  cedes,  to 
Japan,  696 

Peschiera,  173 

Peter  I,  King  of  Servia,  1903—, 
633 

Peterloo,  Massacre  of,  1819,  421 

Philhellenic  Societies,  founded  in 
France,  Germany,  Switzerland, 
England,  and  the  United  States, 
607 

Philippines,  565;   Spain  loses,  574 

Pi  y   Margall,   572 

Picquart,  Colonel,  and  the  Dreyfus 
Case,  359-363;  promoted  Briga- 
dier-General, 363;  becomes  Min- 
ister of  War,  363 

Piedmont  or  Kingdom  of  Sar- 
dinia, acquires  Genoa,  3,  5,  52; 
Victor  Emmanuel  I  and  his  gov- 
ernment, 54-55;  revolution  in, 
and  abdication  of  Victor  Em- 
manuel I,  61-62;  refonns  of 
Charles  Albert  in,  167;  sends  an 


Sl-i 


INDEX 


Piedmont,    continued 

army  to  aid  insurrection  in  Lom- 
bardy,  173;  Charles  Albert  de- 
feated at  Custozza  (1848),  176; 
abdication  of  Charles  Albert, 
181-183;  Constitutional  Statute 
(1848),  185;  accession  of  Victor 
Emmanuel  II,  181,  215-216;  a 
constitutional  state,  216;  takes 
the  lead  in  the  making  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Italy,  216;  Cavour 
in,  216-239;  economic  develop- 
ment of,  218;  Crimean  policy 
of,  212,  219,  613;  Cavour  at  the 
Congress  of  Paris  (1856),  de- 
nounces the  policy  of  Austria  in 
Italy,  220;  army  strengthened 
in,  221;  founding  of  the  Na- 
tional Society,  221;  allied  with 
France  in  war  against  Austria, 
225;  campaign  of  1859,  225 
Peace  of  Villafranca,  225-226 
Lombardy  annexed  to,  228,  389 
Modena,  Parma,  Tuscany,  and  the 
Romagna  annexed  to,  230;  army 
of,  defeats  the  Papal  troops  at 
Castelfidardo,  236;  Naples,  Sic- 
ily, Umbria,  and  the  Marches 
annexed  to,  236;  Kingdom  of, 
gives  way  to  the  Kingdom  of 
Italy,  237;  constitqtional  govern- 
ment in,  377;  constitution  of, 
adopted  with  slight  variations  as 
the  constitution  of  Italy  (1861), 
377-378;  illiteracy  in  (1861),  381; 
signs  Treaty  of  Paris,  (1856), 
615-616 

Pitt,  William,  Earl  of  Chatham, 
432 

Pitt,  William,  the  Younger,  on 
representation  in  Parliament, 
415;  and  Catholic  Emancipa- 
tion, 426 

Pius  IX,  Pope,  18.',6-1S78,  reforms 
of,  166;  flees  from  Rome,  181; 
restored  by  the  French,  182;  his 
government,  215,  220;  to  be 
president  of  the  projected  Ital- 
ian Confederation,  226;  issues 
major  excommunication,  230;  re- 
fuses to  recognize  the  Kingdom 
of  Italy,  237;  loses  temporal 
power  by  the  Italian  occupation 
of  Rome,  301 ;  and  the  Kultur- 
kampf,  306-309;  attitude  to- 
ward the  Law  of  Papal  Guar- 
antees, 378-379;  death  of,  309, 
380 


Pius  X,  Pope,  1903—,  protests 
against  visit  of  President  Loubet 
of  France  to  Victor  Emmanuel 
III  (190.',),  368;  condemns  Law 
of  1905  in  France,  369-370;  atti- 
tude toward  the  Law  of  Papal 
Guarantees,  379 

Plebiscite,  in  France,  December  20, 
1851,  205;  November  21,  1852, 
205-206;  May  8,  1870,  284;  in 
Italy,  March,  1860,  230,  231, 
236 

Plehve,  Minister  of  the  Interior 
(Russia),  1902-1904,  repressive 
regime  of,  707;  assassination  of, 
707 

Plevna,  Siege  of,  623-624,  625,  632 

Plombieres,  Interview  at,  between 
Cavour  and  Napoleon  III,  2-23- 
223,  260 

Plural  Voting,  Double  Vote  in 
France  by  Electoral  Law 
(1820),  81,  rescinded  (1831), 
117;  in  England,  495,  517;  in 
Belgium,    582 

PobyedonostsefF,  influence  of,  in 
Russia,  670-671;  on  parliamen- 
tary institutions  and  the  press, 
671 ;  in  the  reign  of  Nicholas 
II,  676;   removal  of,  712 

Poland,  granted  a  constitution,  38; 
influence  of  the  July  Revolution 
(1830)  in,  100,  108;  revolution 
in,  105,  106-110;  restoration  of 
the  Kingdom  of,  in  1815,  106, 
647;  Alexander  I  grants  a  con- 
stitution to,  107,  648;  friction 
between  the  Poles  and  the  Rus- 
sians, 107,  649-650;  failure  of 
the  insurrection  (1830-1831), 
109,  653;  becomes  a  province  of 
the  Russian  Empire,  109;  influ- 
ence of  events  in  Italy  (1859- 
1860)  upon,  246;  Russia  and 
(1815),  645;  insurrection  (1863) 
in,  662-664;  Russification  of, 
664-665;  persecution  of  the  Jews 
in,   672 

Polignac   Ministry,  90-91 

Polish-Saxon  question  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  7-8 

Pomerania,  acquired  by  Prussia,  8 

Pondicherry,  French  possession, 
1815,  371 

Port  Arthur,  seized  by  Japan, 
695;  China  cedes,  to  Japan, 
696;  Japan  relinquishes,  696; 
Russia      secures      a     lease     of 


INDEX 


815 


Port  Arthur,   continued 

(1898),  697,  699;  Japan  and  the 
Russian  fleet  at,  701;  siege  of, 
701;  Japan  destroys  the  fleet  at, 
702;  surrenders,  702,  709;  Rus- 
sia transfers  to  Japan  her  lease 
of,  703 

Porte.     See  Turkey 

Porto  Rico,  565,  572,  574 

Portsmouth  (England),  local  gov- 
ernment in,  1832,  443 

Portsmouth,  N.  H.,  Treaty  of 
(1905),  702-703 

Portugal,  57;  English  intervention 
in,  423;  stations  of,  in  Africa, 
1815,  551;  acquisitions  in  Africa, 
1884-1890,  554;  and  the  Con- 
gress of  Berlin,  1884-1885,  555; 
flight  of  the  royal  family  to 
Brazil,  1807,  575;  revolution  of 
1820,  576;  constitution  of  1822 
accepted  hy  King  John  VI,  576; 
loss  of  Brazil,  576;  civil  war 
between  Queen  Maria  da  Gloria 
and  Dom  Miguel,  577;  death  of 
Maria,  577;  recent  events  in, 
577;  assassination  of  Carlos  I 
and  the  Crown  Prince,  1908,577; 
accession  of  Manuel  II,  578; 
colonial  possessions  of,  578;  es- 
tablishes trade  centers  at  the  five 
treaty  ports  of  China,  686 

Portugal,  Crown  Prince  of,  assas- 
sinated, 1908,  577 

Posen,  retained  by  Prussia,  8; 
Archbishop  of,  asks  Bismarck's 
aid  in  behalf  of  the  Papacy,  306- 
307 

Postal  Savings  Banks,  in  England, 
459;    in    New    Zealand,    535 

Postal  Union,  International,  591 

Pragmatic  Sanction  (Spain),  565- 
566 

Prague,  Siege  of  (1848),  175; 
Peace  of  (1866),  263,  267; 
Francis  Joseph  I  agrees  to  be 
crowned  at,  398;  University  of, 
divided,  400;  declared  in  a  state 
of  siege   (1893),  401 

Preferential  tariff's  (England  and 
her  colonies),   548 

Presburg,  Diet  of,  155,  removed  to 
Budapest,  171 

Press,  in  Belgium,  freedom  of, 
granted  by  the  Constitution 
(1831),  582;  in  England,  Gag 
Laws  (1819),  422;  in  France, 
freedom      of,      established      by 


Press,   contirmed 

Louis  XVIII,  69;  Law  of  1819, 
78,  rescinded,  81 ;  attempt  to 
destroy  the  freedom  of  the,  88; 
liberty  of  the,  suspended  by  the 
July  Ordinances  (1830),  92;  the 
July  Monarchy  and,  124-125; 
September  Law  of  1835  con- 
cerning, 126-127;  under  the 
Second  French  Republic,  190, 
202;  under  the  Second  Empire, 
209-210;  law  of  1868  concerning, 
281;  practically  unlimited  free- 
dom of,  secured  (1881),  352; 
and  the  Franco-German  War, 
289,291-292;  in  Germany,  censor- 
ship of,  after  the  Conference  of 
Carlsbad,  42;  and  Socialism,  314; 
under  Emperor  William  II.  325; 
in  Japan,  694;  in  Prussia,  under 
Frederick  William  IV,  150,  242; 
and  the  Franco-German  War, 
289,  291-292;  in  Russia,  censor- 
ship of,  under  Nicholas  I,  651- 
652;  Pobyedonostseff  on,  671; 
freedom  of,  during  the  war  with 
Japan,  708;  in  Spain,  1815,  47 

Pretoria,  545 

Pretoria  Convention,  1881,  540; 
Morley  on,  540 

Prim,  General,  leader  of  the  re- 
volt in   Spain,   1865,  569 

Prince  Consort  (Albert  of  Saxe- 
Coburg),  445 

Prince  Edward  Island,  English 
possession,  519,  523;  responsible 
government  granted  to,  1851, 
527;  admitted  into  the  Dominion 
of  Canada,  1813,  529 

Prince  Imperial,  son  of  Napoleon 
III,  212;  and  the  Bonapartists, 
341 

Prince  Regent,  later  George  IV, 
420 

Progress,  Certain  Features  of 
Modern,  719-736 

Proportional  representation,  in 
Switzerland,  590 

Protected  Princes  of  India,  522 

Protection,  Policy  of,  Germany 
adopts  (1819),  310-312;  influ- 
ence of,  on  colonial  policy,  318- 
319;  England  and,  450-455;  in  the 
British  Colonies,  548;  Alexander 
II   of   Russia  adopts,  674 

Provisional  Government  (France), 
143;  composition  of,  188;  achieve- 
ments of,   189-193 


816 


INDEX 


Prussia,  demands  of,  at  Congress 
of  Vienna,  6-7;  acquisitions  of, 
at  Congress  of  Vienna,  8;  and 
the  Holy  Alliance,  14-16;  signs 
Quadruple  Alliance  (1815),  17; 
position  in  the  Diet,  30;  na- 
tional disappointment  after  1S15, 
3-2-ii;  promise  of  a  constitution, 
35;  Metternich's  influence  in,  35; 
King  Frederick  William  III  be- 
comes reactionary,  38 ;  Wartburg 
Festival,  39-40 ;  Carlsbad  Decrees, 
41-44;  surrenders  to  the  leader- 
ship of  Austria,  44;  at  Congress 
of  Troppau  (1820),  59;  at  Con- 
gress of  Verona  (1822),  63; 
recognizes  the  Kingdom  of  Bel- 
gium, 105;  and  the  revolution  in 
Poland,  106-110;  and  the  revo- 
lution in  Germany  (1830),  112; 
and  Turkish  affairs,  132;  London 
Conference  (18J,0),  132;  1830- 
1848,  145-152;  evolution  of,  146- 
152;  revision  of  the  system  of 
taxation,  147;  the  Zollverein,  148- 
149 ;  death  of  Frederick  William 
III,  and  accession  of  Frederick 
William  IV,  149;  the  Letter 
Patent  of  February,  18-i7,  prom- 
ises a  national  assembly,  151 ; 
conflict  between  Frederick  Wil- 
liam IV  and  the  United  Land- 
tag, 152;  events  in  Berlin, 
March,  18Jf8,  173;  Frederick 
William  IV  promises  a  repre- 
sentative constituent  assembly, 
174;  leadership  in  Germany  of- 
fered to  the  King  of,  184-185; 
rejects  the  work  of  the  Frank- 
fort Parliament,  185;  the 
"humiliation  of  Olmiitz,"  185; 
constitution  of  1850,  185-186, 
306 ;  contemplates  intervention 
in  Austro-Sardinian  War,  226- 
227;  reaction  in,  1850-1858,  240; 
a  constitutional  but  not  a  parlia- 
mentary state,  241;  control  of 
the  press,  242;  the  privileged 
class,  243;  economic  transforma- 
tion, 243-244;  industrial  develop- 
ment, 244-245;  rise  of  a  wealthy 
middle  class,  245;  intellectusil 
foundations  for  the  hegemony 
of,  245-246;  the  army  in,  248; 
army  reform  (1860)  under  Wil- 
liam I  and  von  Roon,  249;  op- 
position of  the  Chamber  to 
army     reform,     249;     Bismarck 


Prussia,  continued 
appointed  president  of  the  min- 
istry, 249-250;  struggle  between 
the  Upper  and  the  Lower 
Houses  over  the  budget,  255; 
Bismarck's  policy  of  "  blood 
and  iron "  for,  255 ;  the  three 
wars  of,  256;  Bismarck's  plans 
regarding  Schleswig-Holstein, 
257;  declares  war  on  Denmark, 
258 ;  secures  Schleswig-Holstein 
and  Lauenburg  jointly  wth 
Austria  by  the  Treaty  of 
Vienna,  259,  593;  Convention  of 
Gastein,  259-260;  buys  Lauen- 
burg, 260;  alliance  with  Italy, 
261;  troops  of,  enter  Holstein, 
263;  withdraws  from  the  Con- 
federation, 263;  war  with  Aus- 
tria and  her  allies  (1866),  263; 
General  von  Moltke  conquers 
North  Germany,  264;  defeats 
Austria  at  Koniggratz,  265; 
terms  of  peace  with  Austria, 
267;  annexations  of,  267;  and 
the  North  German  Confedera- 
tion, 268-270;  alliance  wth 
South  German  states,  270;  posi- 
tion of,  in  1866,  287-288;  France 
declares  war  against  (1870), 
293;  South  German  states  join, 
293-294;  invasion  of  France,  296; 
victories  over  the  French  at 
Worth,  Forbach,  Spicheren, 
Borny,  Mars-la-Tours,  and  Gra- 
velotte,  296;  surrender  of  the 
Emperor  Napoleon  III  at 
Sedan,  297;  siege  of  Paris,  298- 
299;  capitulation  of  Metz,  298; 
capitulation  of  Paris  and  armis- 
tice, 299;  Treaties  of  Versailles 
and  Frankfort  with  France,  300; 
unification  of  Germany  com- 
pleted, William  I  becomes  Ger- 
man Emperor,  301;  position  of, 
in  the  German  Empire,  303-304; 
Protestantism  in,  306;  Kultur- 
kampf,  306-310;  the  Falk  Laws, 
308;  conflict  of  Church  and 
State,  308-309;  Falk  Laws  sus- 
pended (1879),  rescinded 
(1886),  religious  orders,  except 
Jesuits,  permitted  to  return 
(1887),  309;  death  of  William 
I,  1888,  322;  accession  and  death 
of  Frederick  III,  322;  accession 
of  William  II,  322;  demand  for 
electoral  reform  in,  326;  demand 


INDEX 


817 


Prussia,  continued 

for  parliamentary  reform,  326; 
military  system  of,  adopted  by 
other  countries,  481 ;  signs 
Treaty  of  Paris  (1856),  615- 
616;  establishes  trade  centers  at 
the  five  treaty  ports  of  China, 
686 

Puebia,  defeat  of  the  French 
troops  at,  278,  280 

Pufing   BiUij,  The,  724 

Punjab,  annexation  of,  by  Eng- 
land, 520 

Pushkin,   652 

Quadrilateral,    The,    173,    226 
Quadruple  Alliance  (1815),  signed 

by  the  Powers,  16-17,  59 
Quebec,  523,  527,  528.    See  Canada 
Queen's  University,  484,  516 
Queensland,      responsible     govern- 
ment  granted   to,   1859,  527;    in 
the    Australian    Commonwealth, 
532 

Radetzky,  Austrian  commander  in 
Italy,  173,  175 

Railroads,  in  the  Australian  Com- 
monwealth, 533 ;  in  Belgium,  582; 
in  Bulgaria,  631;  in  Canada  (Ca- 
nadian Pacific),  530;  in  China, 
704;  in  France,  extension  of,  un- 
der the  Second  Empire,  211;  in 
Germanj%  245,  305;  in  Greece, 
635;  in  Hungary,  government 
ownership  of,  403;  in  Italy,  385; 
in  Japan,  693;  in  New  Zealand, 
government  ownership  of,  535; 
in  Roumania,  632;  in  Russia, 
Trans-Siberian,  675,  696,  697, 
699,  701;  Trans-Caspian,  682; 
invention  of,  724-725;  Hadley, 
A.  T.,  on  the  importance  of, 
in  war,  725-726  ■ 

Rambouillet,   94 

Rand,  gold  discovered  in  the,  541 

Ravenna,  233 

Reaction,  in  Austria  and  Germany, 
23-44;  and  Revolution  in  Spain 
and  Italy,  45-65 

"Recent  Events  in  Romagna " 
(181,6),  by  D'Azeglio,  165 

Reconstruction  of  Europe,  1-22 

Red  Cross  Society,  591;  Russian 
officials  and,  709 

Red  Sea,  Italy  seizes  positions  on 
(1885),  382;  route  to  India,  488 


Redistribution  Act  (England), 
1885,  493-494 

Referendum,  adopted  in  New 
Zealand,  536;  in  Switzerland, 
588-590 

Reform  Bills  (England),  18S2, 
436-438,  483,  492,  511;  1861,  463, 
492;  188J,,  492-493;  1885,  Redis- 
tribution Act,  493-494 

Reform,  The,  143 

Reichenau,  Louis   Philippe  in,   114 

Reichsrath  or  Parliament  of  Aus- 
tria, 395 

Reichstadt,  Duke  of,  son  of  Na- 
poleon Bonaparte,  111,  127,  also 
known  as  King  of  Rome  and  as 
Napoleon  II 

Reichstag,  269,  303-304;  1877, 
Center  the  largest  party  in, 
309;  Socialist  party  in  (1890), 
314-315;  Socialist  party  loses  in 
(1907),  324-325 

Reid,  Stuart  J.,  Lord  Durham's 
biographer,   526    and   note 

Reign  of  Louis  Philippe,  114- 
144 

Rennes,  Court  of  Cassation  orders 
a  retrial  of  Dreyfus  at,  362; 
verdict  of  court-martial  of, 
quashed,  363 

Restoration,  France  during  the,  66- 
99 

Reunion  (formerly  Bourbon), 
Island  of,  French  possession, 
1815,  371 

Revolutions  of  1820-1821,  in  Spain, 
49-50,  62-63;  in  Naples,  57;  in 
Piedmont,  61-62;  reasons  for  the 
failure  of  the  movements  of 
1820,  62 

Revolutions  of  1830,  in  France, 
95-96;  influence  of,  100,  429; 
in  Belgium,  103-104;  in  Poland, 
108-109;  in  Italy,  110-112;  in 
Germany,  112 

Revolutions  of  18^8,  in  France, 
141-144,  187;  influence  of,  145; 
in  Hungary,  169-171;  in  Bo- 
hemia, 171-172;  in  Lombardy- 
Venetia,  172-173;  in  Germany, 
173-174;  the  March  revolutions 
everywhere  triumphant,  174; 
results   of,    185-186 

Rhodes,  Cecil,  and  the  Jameson 
Raid,  542 

Rhodesia,   542,   545 

Richardson,  murder  of,  in  Japan 
(1862),  691 


818 


INDEX 


Richelieu,  Duke  of.  Minister  of 
Louis  XVIII,  75;  reorganizes 
the  army,  76;  and  the  electoral 
system,  77;  and  the  press,  78 

Riego,  proclaims  Constitution  of 
IS  12,  49 

Rio  de  Oro,  574 

Rio  Muni,  574 

Risorgimento,  II,  founded  by 
Cavour,   217 

Risorgimento,  The,  166;  and  see 
215-239 

Rivet  Law   (France),  337 

Roberts,  Lord,  in  the  South  Af- 
rican War,  543-544 

Rocket,  The,  725 

Rodjestvensky,  Admiral,  Russian 
fleet  under,  destroyed  by  Ad- 
miral Togo,   May    (1905),  702 

Romagna,  Revolutionary  move- 
ments in  (1831),  110;  "Recent 
Events  in  Romagna,"  by  D'Aze- 
glio,  165;  agreement  at  Plom- 
bieres  concerning,  223;  desires 
annexation  to  Piedmont,  226;  an- 
nexed to  Piedmont  (1860),  230 

Roman  Catholic  Church.  See 
Catholic  Church   (Roman) 

Rome,  Napoleon  on,  as  the  capital 
of  Italy,  50;  and  the  revolu- 
tionary movements  of  1831,  110, 
111;  declared  a  republic,  181; 
siege  and  capture  of,  by  the 
French,  182;  223;  not  included  in 
the  new  Italian  Kingdom  (1861), 
237;  the  question  of,  in  the  new 
Italian  Kingdom,  238;  and  the 
Catholic  Church,  238;  seized  by 
Italian  troops  and  becomes  the 
capital  of  the  Kingdom  of  Italy 
(1870),  301 ;  President  Loubet  of 
France  visits  Victor  Emmanuel 
III  in,  368;  and  the  question  of 
the  Papacy,  378-380;  riots  in 
(1889),  383 

Rome,  King  of  (son  of  Napoleon 
I),  2,  127,  212.  See  Duke  of 
Reichstadt 

Romilly,  statement  in  House  of 
Commons  concerning  the  Vene- 
tians, 10;  and  the  Penal  Code, 
424 

Roon,  Albrecht  von,  Minister  of 
War  under  William  I,  249;  at 
Koniggratz,  265 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  anu  the 
Treaty  of  Portsmouth  (1905), 
702;  and  the  Second  Peace  Con- 


Roosevelt,  Theodore,   continued 
ference    at    the    Hague    (1907), 
734 

Root,  Elihu,  on  the  significance  of 
the  Peace  Conferences  at  the 
Hague,  735 

Rosebery,  Lord,  Ministry  of,  510- 
511;  and  Lord  Salisbury,  510 

Rossi,  murder  of,  181 

Rotten  boroughs  (England,  1815), 
413-414 

Roumania,  404;  union  of  Mol- 
davia and  Wallachia  into,  618; 
Alexander  John  I  or  Couza, 
Prince  of,  618-619;  reign  of 
Charles  I,  619-620;  proclaims  its 
independence.  May  21,  1877,  623; 
complete  independence  recog- 
nized by  Treaty  of  San  Stefano, 
1878,  624;  declared  independent 
by  Congress  of  Berlin,  1878, 
625-626;  forced  to  cede  Bes- 
sarabia to  Russia  and  to  receive 
the  Dobrudscha,  625-626;  since 
1878,  632;  proclaimed  a  king- 
dom, 1881,  632;  aspirations  of, 
635 

Roumelia,  Eastern,  made  a  part  of 
Bulgaria  by  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano,  1878,  624;  disposition 
of,  by  the  Congress  of  Berlin, 
1878,  625;  union  of,  with  Bul- 
garia, 1885,  628 

Roxburgh,  412 

Royal  Geographical  Societj'^  sends 
Cameron  to  rescue  Livingstone, 
553 

Royal   Statute    (ISS-i),  Spain,  567 

Rudini,  Marquis  di,  Prime  Minis- 
ter (1896),  policy  of  pacifica- 
tion, 383 

Rugby,   477 

Rumania.     See  Roumania 

Rumelia.     See  Roumelia 

Russell,  Lord  John,  created  Earl 
Russell,  1861,  in  the  Grey  Min- 
istry, 430;  introduces  First  Re- 
form Bill  in  House  of  Commons, 
1831,  430;  speech,  431;  intro- 
duces Second  Reform  Bill,  1831, 
435;  introduces  Third  Reform 
Bill,  436;  on  the  question  of 
further  reform,  446;  Prime  Min- 
ister and  the  Reform  Bill  of 
1866,  462 

Russia,  Demands  of,  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  6;  acquisitions 
of,    8;    and    the    Second    Treaty 


INDEX 


819 


Russia,   continued 

of  Paris  (1815),  13;  and  the 
Holy  Alliance,  14-16;  signs 
Quadruple  Alliance  (1815),  17; 
and  the  Congress  oi  Troppau, 
59;  and  the  Congress  of  Verona, 
62;  prevented  from  acting  in 
the  Belgian  aflFairs,  105;  recog- 
nizes the  Kingdom  of  Belgium, 
105;  and  the  revolution  in  Po- 
land, 106-110;  oflFers  aid  to  Tur- 
key against  Mehemet  Ali,  132; 
Treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi 
(183S)  with  Turkey,  132;  and  the 
London  Conference  (181,0),  132; 
aids  Austria  against  Hungary, 
180;  and  the  London  Confer- 
ence (1861,),  258;  attitude  of 
Bismarck  toward  (1878),  320; 
alliance  with  France  (Dual) 
1891,  357;  growth  of,  546;  at 
the  Conference  of  the  Powers 
(1816),  554;  at  the  Congress  of 
Berlin  (1884-1885),  555;  and 
Finland,  595;  and  the  Ottoman 
Empire,  601 ;  and  the  Greek 
War  of  Independence,  606-609; 
and  the  Treaty  of  London 
(1827),  609;  battle  of  Navarino 
(1827),  610;  war  with  Turkey 
(1828),  610-611;  Treaty  of 
Adrianople  (1829),  611;  guaran- 
tees the  independence  of  Greece, 
611;  and  the  Danubian  Prin- 
cipalities, 611;  ambitions  of 
Nicholas  I,  611-612;  and  the 
"holy  places"  in  Palestine,  612; 
sends  troops  into  Moldavia  and 
Wallachia  (1853),  612;  war 
with  Turkey,  612;  coalition 
against,  613;  siege  and  fall  of 
Sebastopol,  614-615,  654;  Treaty 
of  Paris,  1856,  615-616;  disre- 
gards neutrality  of  the  Black 
Sea,  recovers  part  of  Bessarabia, 
616;  declares  war  against  Tur- 
key, 1877,  623;  allies  of,  623; 
siege  of  Plevna,  623-624;  Treaty 
of  San  Stefano,  1878,  320,  624; 
by  Congress  of  Berlin,  1878, 
retains  a  part  of  Turkish  Ar- 
menia and  receives  Bessarabia, 
320,  626;  influence  of,  in  Bul- 
garia, 628;  conspiracy  against 
Alexander  of  Bulgaria,  630;  atti- 
tude of,  toward  the  breaches  of 
the  Berlin  Treaty  of  1878,  629, 
640;  secret  treaty  with  Austria, 


Russia,  continued 
640;  reign  of  Alexander  I, 
1801-1825,  645-650;  Russia  in 
1815,  645-646;  Alexander  I 
and  Poland,  107,  647-648;  Alex- 
ander's progressive  domestic 
policy,  648;  his  liberal  foreign 
policy,  649;  Alexander  becomes 
reactionary,  649;  death  of,  650; 
reign  of  Nicholas  I,  1825-1855, 
650-655;  system  of  repression  by 
police  and  censorship,  651-652; 
literature  under,  652-653;  do- 
mestic policy,  653;  foreign 
policy,  653-654;  death  of,  655; 
reign  of  Alexander  II,  1855- 
1881,  accession  and  liberal  tend- 
encies of  Alexander  II,  655; 
prevailing  system  of  land  ten- 
ure, the  mir  and  the  serfs  in, 
655-657;  Edict  of  Emancipation, 
1861,  657;  the  land  problem, 
657-660;  establishment  of  the 
zemstvos,  660;  reform  of  the 
judicial  system,  661;  Polish  in- 
surrection of  1863,  662-663; 
Polish  nobility  crushed,  664; 
Russificatlon  of  Poland,  665; 
Alexander  becomes  reactionary, 
665;  rise  of  Nihilism,  666-668; 
assassination  of  Alexander  II, 
1881,  670;  reign  of  Alexander 
III,  1881-1894,  670-676;  char- 
acter and  policy  of,  670;  influ- 
ence of  Pobyedonostseff,  670- 
671;  persecution  of  the  Jews, 
672;  policy  of  Russificatlon, 
672;  progressive  features  of  the 
reign,  673;  industrial  revolution, 
673-674;  Sergius  de  Witte  ap- 
pointed Minister  of  Finance 
(1892),  674;  policy  of  protec- 
tion adopted,  674;  railway  con- 
struction, 675 ;  rise  of  labor  prob- 
lems, 675;  rise  of  a  rich  bour- 
geoisie, 675;  system  of  privilege 
undermined,  676;  death  of  Alex- 
ander III,  189/,,  676;  Nicholas 
II,  189/,^,  676-680;  accession 
and  policy  of  repression,  676; 
increasing  disaffection  under, 
677;  condition  of  the  peasantry, 
677;  persecution  of  the  "intel- 
lectuals," 678;  and  Finland,  678- 
680;  abrogates  the  Finnish  con- 
stitution, 679;  in  Asia,  681;  seeks 
access  to  the  sea,  682;  acquisi- 
tions   from    China    (1858-1860), 


820 


INDEX 


Russia,  continued 
682,  687;  conquest  of  Turkestan, 
68;;?;  intervenes  with  France  and 
Germany  in  Japan,  696;  gains 
entrance  into  Manchuria,  697; 
secures  a  lease  of  Port  Arthur 
(1S98),  697;  helps  to  rescue  the 
legations  in  Peking,  698;  activ- 
ity of,  in  Manchuria,  699;  diplo- 
matic negotiations  with,  con- 
cerning Manchuria,  700;  Russo- 
Japanese  War,  1904-1905,  701- 
702;  siege  of  Port  Arthur,  701; 
Mukden  captured  by  the  Jap- 
anese, 702;  fleet  of,  destroj^ed 
by  the  Japanese,  702;  signs 
Treaty  of  Portsmouth  (1905), 
702-703;  reaction  of  the  Jap- 
anese war  upon,  706;  von 
Plehve's  repressive  policy  in, 
707;  assassination  of  von 
Plehve,  707;  Nicholas  II  enters 
upon  a  more  liberal  policy,  708; 
demands  of  the  liberals  in,  not 
granted  by  the  Tsar,  708-709; 
disorder  in,  709;  Decree  of  Dec, 
190-',,  709-710;  "Bloody  Sun- 
day" (January  22,  1905),  710; 
disorder  in,  710;  Manifesto  of 
August  19,  1905,  710-711;  gen- 
eral strike  (October,  1905)  in, 
711;  Manifesto  of  October  30, 
1905,  712;  popular  demand  for 
a  constitution  refused,  712;  Gov- 
ernment of,  makes  concessions 
to  Finland,  713;  the  Tsar  con- 
stitutes the  Council  of  the  Em- 
pire, 713;  the  "organic  laws" 
713;  Tsar  opens  the  Duma, 
May  10,  1906,  713;  Tsar  dis- 
solves the  Duma,  July  22,  1906, 
715;  the  Second  Duma,  715-716; 
Tsar  alters  the  electoral  system, 
716;  the  Third  Duma,  716;  the 
transformation  of  the  mir 
(1909),  717;  Tsar  restores  tha 
liberties  of  Finland  (1905),  717; 
and  Finland  (1909),  718 

Russo-Japanese  War,  701-702 

Sadler,     Thomas,     and     the     child 

labor  agitation,  442 
Sadowa   or   Koniggratz,   battle   of, 

between     Prussia     and     Austria 

(1866),  265,  478;  importance  of, 

to  France,  288 
Sagasta,    leader    of    the    Spanish 

Liberals,  1876,  573 


Saghalin,  Island  of,  Russia  cedes 
to  Japan  the  southern  half  of, 

703 

St.   Croix,   594 

St.  John,  594 

St.  Louis,  on  west  coast  of  Af- 
rica,   French    possession,    373 

St.  Lucia,  retained  by  England  in 
1815,  9,  519 

St.  Petersburg,  revolt  in  (1825), 
650;  attempts  to  kill  Tsar  Alex- 
ander II  at,  669;  population  of, 
675;  resolution  of  the  Ini^titute 
of  Mining  Engineers  at,  on  the 
war  with  Japan,  706;  representa- 
tives of  the  zemstvos  meet  at 
(1904),  708;  students  in,  revolt, 
709;  "Bloody  Sunday"  (Janu- 
ary 22,  1905)  in,  710;  electorate 
in,  711 

St.  Pierre,  French  possession, 
1815,  371 

St.  Simon,  and  socialism,  138 

St.  Thomas,  594 

Salisbury,  Lord,  leader  of  the  Con- 
servatives, 1881-1902,  497,  First 
Ministry,  1885,  497;  opposition 
of,  to  the  Irish  Home  Rule 
and  Land  Bills,  503;  Sec- 
ond Ministry,  1886-1892,  505- 
507;  policy  of  coercion  for  Ire- 
land, 505;  Land  Purchase  Act 
of  1891  passed,  505-506;  County 
Councils  Act  of  1888,  506;  Social 
Legislation,  506-507;  increase  of 
the  navT,  1889,  507;  and  the 
Second  'Home  Rule  Bill,  509; 
and  the  House  of  Lords,  509- 
510;  and  Lord  Rosebery,  510; 
Third  Ministry,  1895-1902,  511- 
515;  assumes  the  Foreign  Office, 
511 

Salmeron,  572 

Salzburg,  8 

Samara,   677 

Samarkand,  682 

Samoan    Islands,   319 

Samurai,    The,    689,    693 

San  Domingo,  569 

San  Mai-ino,  52 

San  Stefano,  Treaty  of,  1878,  624; 
opposition  to,  624-625;  England 
demands  revision  of,  625 

Sand,  Karl,  assassin  of  Kotzebue, 
40 

Sand  River  Convention,  1852, 
538;  Morley  on,  540 

Santiago,  battle  of,  574 


INDEX 


821 


Saragossa,   49 

Sardinia,  Island  of,  Victor  Em- 
manuel I  flees  to,  5,  51,54;  King- 
dom of,  see  Piedmont 

Saskatchewan,  admitted  to  the  Do- 
minion of  Canada,   1005,  529 

Savona,  Mazzini  imprisoned  at, 
161 

Savoy,  part  of,  added  to  France 
by  Treaty  of  Paris  (ISU),  3; 
House  of,  182,  215,  221,  378; 
agreement  at  Plombifcres  con- 
cerning, 223;  annexation  of,  to 
France  (1860),  231;  Amadeo  of, 
570-571 

Saxe-Coburg,  Albert  of.  Prince 
Consort,  445;  Ferdinand  of, 
elected   Prince   of   Bulgaria,  630 

Saxe-Weimar,    37 

Salonika,  642;  the  deposed  Sul- 
tan Abdul  Hamid  II,  taken  as 
a  prisoner  of  state  to,  643 

Saxony,  King  of,  restored  (1815), 
8;  cessions  of,  to  Prussia  at  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  8;  position  in 
the  Diet,  30;  government  in  1815, 
36;  revolutionary  movements  in 
(1830),  112;  supports  Austria  in 
the  war  of  1866,  263;  in  the 
North  German  Confederation, 
268,  269 

Scandinavian  States,  The,  592-600 

Schaumburg-Lippe,  304 

Scheurer-Kestner,  and  the  Drey- 
fus Case,  360 

Schleiermacher,  44 

Schleswig-Holstein,  question  of, 
256-259 ;  Schleswig  incorporated 
with  Denmark,  257;  Danish  war 
concerning,  258;  all  rights  to, 
renounced  by  Denmark  in  favor 
of  Austria  and  Prusssia  by  the 
Treaty  of  Vienna  (1861f),  259; 
Convention  of  Gastein  (1865), 
259-260;  Austria  brings  question 
of,  before  the  Diet,  263;  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Kingdom  of  Prussia, 
267;  Frederick  VI  and,  592; 
Frederick   VII   and,  593 

School  boards,  England,  479,  514 

Schopenhauer,  246 

Schwarzenberg,  Austrian  Minister, 
179 

SchwarzhofF,  General  von,  address 
at  the  First  Peace  Conference 
at  the  Hague  (1899),  731 

Science,  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
720-721 


Scotland,  Representation  of,  in 
House  of  Commons,  1815,  410; 
condition  in  the  counties  of,  in 
1815,  412;  given  increased  repre- 
sentation, 437;  Act  of  1833  cor- 
recting abuses  in  municipal 
government  in,  444;  Reform 
Bill,  1868,  for,  464;  Franchise 
Bill,  493;  Gladstonian  vote  in, 
1886,  504;  County  Councils  Act 
of  1889,  506;  Old  Age  Pensions 
Law  in,  516 

Sebastopol,  Siege  of,  614;  fall  of, 
615,   654 

Second  Empire,  The  Transforma- 
tion of,  272-284 

Second  French  Republic  and  the 
Founding  of  the  Second  Empire, 
The,  187-214 

Seeley,  Sir  John  Robert,  in  his 
"  Expansion  of  England "  on 
the  government  of  India,  522 

Senegal,  French  possession  1815, 
371 ;  Valley,  annexed  to  France 
under   Napoleon   III,  373,  374 

Separation  of  Church  and  State  in 
France,   364-371 

September   Laws    (1835),   125-127 

Septennatc,  Establishment  of  the, 
343 

Seven  Weeks'  or  Austro-German 
War   (1866),  263-267 

Serfs,  Emancipation  of,  in  Russia 
(1861),  657 

Sergius,  Grand  Duke,  assassinated, 
710 

Serrano,  Marshal,  569;  Regency 
of,  570;  and  the  Spanish  Re- 
public, 572 

Servia,  Kingdom  of,  404;  revolt 
of  the  Servians,  604;  becomes 
autonomous  principalitv  tribu- 
tary to  the  Sultan,  604,  609; 
Slavs  of,  aid  Herzegovina,  1815, 
620;  and  Montenegro  declare 
war  against  Turkey,  1876,  622- 
623;  complete  independence  of, 
recognized  by  the  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano,  1818,  624;  opposition  to 
the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano, 
1818,  624-625;  declared  inde- 
pendent by  Congress  of  Ber- 
lin, 1818,  625-626;  attacks 
Bulgaria,  1885,  629;  Treaty 
of  Bucharest,  1886,  629;  since 
1818,  633;  Kingdom  proclaimed, 
1882,  633;  aspirations  of,  635; 
protests     against    Austria-Hun- 


8£S 


INDEX 


Servia,   contimied 
gary's  annexation  of  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina,    639;    (1909),    641- 
642 

Seville,   565 

Shanghai,  opened  to  British  trade 
by  Treaty  of  Nanking  (181,2), 
685 

Shantung,  Germany  establishes  a 
"  sphere  of  influence  "  in  (1898), 
697 

Sheffield,  unrepresented  in  Parlia- 
ment (1815),  414 

Shimonoseki,  Treaty  of  (1895), 
695-696 

Shogun,  The,  688-689;  breaks 
policy  of  isolation,  690-691;  over- 
throw of  the  Shogunate,  691; 
abolition   of  the   Shogunate,   692 

Siberia,  109,  646,  651,  652,  653, 
656,  668,  669,  681,  682,  707,  713 

Sibir,  681 

Sicilies,  The  Kingdom  of  the  Two. 
See   Naples 

Sicily,  51,  62;  conquest  of,  by 
Garibaldi,  234-235;  illiteracy  in, 
1861,  381;  emigration  from,  386 

Sickness  Insurance  Law  (1883)  in 
Germany,  316 

Silesia,  23 

Simon  Ministry  dismissed,  349 

Six  Acts  or  Gag  Laws,  England 
(1819),  422 

Slavery,  abolished  in  the  French 
colonies,  190;  abolition  of,  in 
British  Empire,  decreed  by  Law 
of  1833,  440;  abolished  in 
British  South  Africa,  183^,  537 

Slave-trade,  denounced  at  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  (1815),  12; 
abolished  by  England,  1807,  439 

Slavonia,    177,   396 

Slavs,  25,  154,  177;  attitude  toward 
Austria  in  the  Austro-Prussian 
War  of  1866,  266;  favored  by 
Taaflfe  Ministry,  400;  404;  405 

Slovenes,  demands  of,  397;  in 
Carniola,  Slavicize  the  province, 
400 

Smith,  Adam,  author  of  "  Wealth 
of  Nations/'  1116,  417 

Smith,  Sidney,  on  the  Irish  Church, 
471 

Sobranje,  elects  Ferdinand  of 
Saxe-Coburg,  Prince  of  Bul- 
garia, 630 

Social  Democratic  Party  (Ger- 
many), 325 


Social  Le^slation,  in  Germany,  315- 
316;  in  Austria,  400;  in  England, 
459,  506-507,  515-516;  in  New 
Zealand,  535-536;  in  Denmark, 
594 

Socialism,  in  France,  under  Louis 
Philippe,  138;  Louis  Blanc  and, 
138,  his  theories,  189;  under  the 
Provisional  Government,  188; 
National  Workshops,  191-194; 
growth  of,  under  Napoleon  III, 
331-332;  in  Germany,  312-318, 
324-325;  in  Austria,  400-402;  in 
England,  458;  Bakounine  and, 
667;  in  Russia,  667-668,  675,  707 

Sofia,  capital  of  Bulgaria,   631 

Solferino,  battle  of,  225,  226,  725 

Solovief,  attempt  of,  upon  the  life 
of  Alexander  II,  1819,  669 

Somaliland,  Italian  protectorate 
established  over,  382 

Sonderbund  (18Ifl),  586 

Soudan,  Egypt  loses,  561 ;  recov- 
ery of,  562;  Turkey  and,  643 

Soult,  minister  of  Louis  Philippe, 
131 

South  Africa.  See  British  South 
Africa 

South  Africa,  Union  of,  1909,  544- 
545,  549 

South  African  Republic.  See 
Transvaal 

South  America,  48;  Monroe  Doc- 
trine and,  64-65;  Garibaldi  in, 
232;  Guiana  in,  a  French  pos- 
session, 1815,  371;  Italian  emi- 
gration to,  386;  revolts  in,  565, 
574 

South  Australia,  responsible  gov- 
ernment granted  to,  527;  in  the 
Australian  Commonwealth,  532 

Spa  Fields,  420 

Spain,  Reaction  and  Revolution  in, 
45-50;  Constitution  of  1812,  45- 
46;  restoration  of  Ferdinand 
VII,  46 ;  condition  of,  in  1815,  47- 
48;  disintegration  of  the  Spanish 
Empire,  48-49;  Revolution  of 
1820,  49-50;  proclamation  of 
Constitution  of  1812,  50;  and  the 
Congress  of  Verona,  62;  invasion 
of  the  French,  63;  siege  of 
Cadiz,  63;  reaction  in,  63;  Eng- 
land prohibits  the  conquest  of 
Spanish-American  colonies  by 
France  and  allies,  64-65;  joint 
intervention  with  England  and 
France  in  Mexico,  277,  569;  revo- 


INDEX 


823 


Spain,  contimied 
lution  of  1868  and  candidacy  of 
Leopold  of  Hohenzollern,  290- 
291;  stations  of,  in  Africa, 
1815,  551;  and  Portugal,  564- 
578;  Spain  since  1823,  564-575; 
revenge  of  King  Ferdinand  VII 
in,  after  1823,  564;  loses  the 
American  colonies,  565;  and  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction,  565-566; 
death  of  Ferdinand  VII  and  ac- 
cession of  Isabella,  566;  the  Carl- 
ist  war,  566-567;  Christina  as 
Regent  grants  the  Royal  Statute 
of  183-i,  567;  disturbed  political 
life  in,  1833-1858,  568;  Constitu- 
tion of  1837,  568;  Queen  Regent 
driven  into  exile,  Isabella  II  de- 
clared of  age,  568;  overthrow 
of  Isabella  II,  and  establishment 
of  a  provisional  government, 
569;  regency  of  Marshal  Serrano, 
570;  Amadeo  of  Savoy  chosen 
king,  570;  abdication  of  Amadeo, 
571;  establishment  of  the  Re- 
public, 1873-1874,  571-572; 
causes  of  its  fall,  572;  Alfonso 
XII  recognized  as  king,  1874, 
572;  the  Constitution  of  1876, 
573;  death  of  Alfonso  XII  and 
regency  of  Queen  Maria  Chris- 
tina, 574;  Cuban  War,  1868-1878, 
1895,  574;  Spanish-American 
War,  1898,  574;  Treaty  of  Paris, 
1898,  Spain  renounces  Cuba, 
Porto  Rico,  and  the  Philippines, 
574;  possessions  in  1898,  574; 
Alfonso  XIII  assumes  power  in 
(1902),  576;  Alexander  I  (Rus- 
sia)  and,  649 

Spanish-American  Colonies,  Eng- 
land and,  64-65;  Spain  loses, 
565,  574 

Spanish-American  War  (1898),  574 

Speke,  English  explorer,  finds  one 
source  of  the  Nile,  552 

Spicheren,  Germans  defeat  French 
at,  296 

Staal,  M.  de.  President  of  the 
First  Peace  Conference  at  the 
Hague,  Address  of,  730-731 

StambuloflF,  Dictatorship  of,  630- 
631;  murder  of,  631 

Standard,  The,  419 

Stanley,  Henry  M.,  explorations  of 
the  Congo  River  system,  553; 
as  organizer  in  the  Congo,  1879- 
1884,  555 


Stanley,  later  Lord  Derby,  in  the 
Grey  Ministry,  430;  on  the  Re- 
form Bill,  434 

State  Insurance,  in  Germany,  315- 
316;  in  Austria,  400;  in  England, 
459,  515-516;  in  New  Zealand, 
535-536;  in  Denmark,  594 

State  Socialism  in  Germany,  315- 
316.  See  also  State  Insurance 
and  Social  Legislation 

Staten   Island,  Garibaldi  at,  233 

States  of  the  Church.  See  Papal 
States 

Steam,  engine,  407;  age  of,  721; 
navigation,  723-724;  locomotive, 
724-725 

Stein,  Baron  vom,  43,  139 

Stephen,  Sir  Leslie,  on  prefer- 
ment in  the  Established  Church, 
416 

Stephens,  James,  leader  of  the 
Fenian  movement  in  Ireland, 
470 

Stephenson,  George,  and  steam 
locomotives,  725 

Stepniak,   on   Nihilism,   666 

Stockholm,  capital  of  Sweden,  596 

Stolypin,  Prime  Minister,  715,  716; 
and  the  transformation  of  the 
mir,  717 

Storthing  (Norway)  established 
(1814),  595,  596,  598 

Strassburg,  Louis  Philippe  at,  128, 
199;  surrender  of  ^-^870;,  299 

Strike,  The  resort  to  the  general, 
in  Russia,  711-712 

Suez  Canal,  purchase  of  shares  of, 
by  England,  488;  Ismail  and, 
558 

Sumatra,   581 

Surinam,  581 

Sviatopolk  Mirski,  Prince,  Russian 
Minister  of  Home  AflFairs,  708, 
710 

Sweden,  loses  Pomerania  by  the 
Congress  of  Vienna,  8;  acquires 
Norway  by  Treaty  of  Kiel 
(1814),  10,  592,  595;  Russia  ac- 
quires Finland  from,  595,  645; 
war  with  Norway,  595-596 ;  Union 
with  Norway,  596;  Constitution 
of  1866,  597;  friction  with  Nor- 
way, 597-598;  dissolution  of  the 
Union  with  Norway  and  Treaty 
of  Carlstad  (1905),  599;  death 
of  Oscar  II,  and  accession  of 
Gustavus  V  (1907),  600;  Fran- 
chise Reform  Bill  of  1909,  600, 


8S4> 


INDEX 


Switzerland,  territorial  acquisitions 
of,  by  Congress  of  Vienna,  10; 
influence  of  the  July  Revolution 
;i830)  in,  100;  attitude  of,  to- 
ward the  Spanish  Republic,  51-2 ; 
condition  of  (1S15),  584;  Pact  of 
1815,  12,  584;  importance  of  the 
cantons  in,  584-585;  "era  of 
regeneration,"  1830-18-^7,585;  the 
Sonderbund,  586;  Constitution  of 
1848,  586-587;  the  chief  signifi- 
cance of,  587;  important  con- 
tributions to  democratic  govern- 
ment, 588-590;  the  Landesge- 
meinde  cantons,  588;  the  refer- 
endum, 588-589;  the  initiative, 
589;  spread  of  the  referendum 
and  the  initiative,  590;  propor- 
tional representation,  590;  popu- 
lation of,  590;  neutrality  of,  591 

Sybel,  von,  estimate  of  the  German 
Act  of  Confederation,  32;  on 
German  unity,  34;  246 

Sydney,  531 

Syria,"  Mehemet  Ali,  in,  131,  558; 
part  of  the  Ottoman  Empire, 
1815,  601 

Sz^chenyi,  Count  Stephen,  reforms 
of,    in    Hungary,    156 

Taaflfe  Ministry,  1879-1893,  400; 
fall  of,  401 

Talienwan,  697 

Talleyrand,  at  Congress  of  Vienna, 
4;  forms  secret  alliance  between 
England,  Austria,  and  France 
(January,  1815),  7 

Tanganyika,  Lake,  552 

Tashkend,    682 

Tasmania,  responsible  government 
granted  to,  527 ;  in  the  Australian 
Commonwealth,  532 

Telegraph,  726 

Telegraph  Union,  International, 
591 

Tel-el-Kebir,  Wolseley  defeats 
Arabi  at,  559 

Telephone,  invented  by  Alexander 
Graham  Bell  (1876),  726 

Temple,  Cowper-Temple  amend- 
ment to  Forster  Education  Act 
of  1870,  480 

Terra  Australis,  530 

Terror,  The  White,  73-74 

Terrorism    (Russia),   668,   671 

Test  Act,  Repeal  of  (1828),  425  _ 

Tests  (religious),  in  English  Uni- 
versities abolished  (1871),  483 


Tewfik,  Khedive  of  Egypt,  1879- 
1892,  revolt  of  Arabi  Pasha, 
559 

Thessaly,  the  Powers  recommend 
the  cession  of,  to  Greece  (1878), 
626;  Sultan  cedes,  to  Greece 
(1881),  634;  Greece  loses  parts 
of   (1897),  635 

Thiers,  protests  against  the  edicts 
of  Charles  X,  94;  Manifesto  in 
favor  of  Louis  Philippe,  96; 
rivalry  of  Guizot  and,  130;  Min- 
istry of,  131-132;  on  railroads, 
211;  opposes  war  against  Prus- 
sia, 293;  elected  "Chief  of 
the  Executive  Power "  by  the 
National  Assembly  at  Bordeaux, 
arranges  terms  of  peace  with 
Bismarck  at  Versailles,  300; 
government  forces  withdrawn 
from  Paris  by,  333;  attitude 
toward  the  Commune,  334;  gov- 
ernment of,  336-342;  and  the 
Rivet  Law,  337;  policy  of,  337- 
338;  and  the  liberation  of  the 
territory,  338;  reform  in  local 
government,  339;  army  reform, 
339;  and  the  Republic,  340-341; 
outvoted  in  the  Assembly  and 
resigns    (1873),  341-342 

Third  Section,  part  of  the  Rus- 
sian police  system,  651,  669,  671- 
672 

Three  F's,  The,  491 

Thuringian  Duchies,  join  ZoU- 
verein,   148. 

Tientsin,  Treaties  of,  1858,  686, 
confirmed,  1860,  687 

Tithe  War,  Ireland,  472 

Tobago,  retained  by  England  in 
1815,  9.  519 

Tocqueville,  de,  on  the  French 
Revolution  of  IS^S,  187 

Todleben,  at  Sebastopol,  614;  at 
siege  of  Plevna,  623 

Togo,  Admiral,  destroys  the  Rus- 
sian fleet   (1905),  702 

Togoland,  German  colony  in  Af- 
rica, 319 

Tokio,  capital  of  Japan,  692,  693; 
University  established  at,  693 

Tonkin,  France  sends  expedition  to, 
353;  failure  of  the  war  in,  355; 
annexed  (1SS5),  374 

Toulouse,  speech  of  Waldeck- 
Rousseau  at,  on  the  question  of 
Church  and  State  (1900),  364- 
366 


INDEX 


825 


Tours,  branch  seat  of  the  French 
government  during  the  siege  of 
Paris,  298 

Trades  Unions,  in  England,  growth 
of,  457 

Trans-Caspian  railroad,  682 

Transformation  of  the  Second  Em- 
pire, The,  272-284 

Transleithania,  395.     See  Hungary 

Trans-Siberian  railroad,  675,  696, 
699,  701;  Russia  extends,  to 
Vladivostok,  697 

Transvaal,  The,  founding  of,  538; 
independence  of,  acknowledged 
by  Great  Britain,  1852,  538;  an- 
nexed to  the  British  Empire, 
1877,538;  Majuba  Hill,  539;  and 
the  Pretoria  Convention,  1881, 
540;  and  the  London  Convention, 
188Ii,  540;  discovery  of  gold, 
188Jt,  541;  Jameson  Raid,  1895, 
641-542;  Sir  Alfred  Milner's 
Reports  on,  18d9,  542;  and 
the  South  African  War,  543- 
544;  annexed  to  the  British 
Empire,  1902,  544.  See  Trans- 
vaal Colony 

Transvaal  Colony,  responsible  gov- 
ernment granted  to,  1906,  528, 
544;  position  of,  in  the  Union  of 
South  Africa  (1909),  544-545. 

Transylvania,  a  part  of  Hungary, 
24;  allowed  a  certain  measure 
of  autonomy,  155;  severed  from 
Hungary,  388;  position  of,  in  the 
Empire  (1861),  390,  392,  396; 
demands  of  the  Roumanians  in, 
403 

Treaties,  Kiel  (1814),  Denmark 
and  Sweden,  592;  (First)  Paris 
(18U),  France  and  the  Allies,  3, 
5;  (Secret)  Treaty  of  Defensive 
Triple  AlUance  concluded  at  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  (1815), 
France,  England,  and  Austria 
against  Russia  and  Prussia,  7; 
(Second)  Paris  (1815),  Louis 
XVHI  and  the  Allies,  13;  Holy 
Alliance  (1815),  Russia  and  the 
Powers,  14;  Quadruple  Alliance 
(1815),  Russia,  Prussia,  Austria, 
and  England,  16-17;  London 
(1821),  England,  Russia,  and 
France  on  the  question  of  Greece, 
609;  Adrianople  (1829),  Russia 
and  Turkey,  611;  London  (1830- 
1831),  recognizes  the  Kingdom 
of       Belgium,       105;       Unkiar 


Treaties,  continued 

Skelessi  (1833),  Russia  and 
Turkey,  132;  London  (1840), 
England,  Russia,  Austria,  and 
Prussia  on  the  Eastern  Ques- 
tion, 132;  Nanking  (1842),  Eng- 
land and  China,  685;  (1844) 
United  States  and  China  (Com- 
mercial), 686;  London  Protocol 
(1852),  concerning  Schleswig- 
Holstein,  257-258;  (1854)  United 
States  and  Japan  (Commercial), 
691;  Paris  (1856),  England, 
France,  Austria,  Russia,  Prussia, 
Sardinia,  and  Turkey,  615-616; 
Tientsin  (1858),  England  and 
China,  France  and  China,  686, 
confirmed  (1860),  687;  Zurich 
(1859)  (Preliminaries  at  Villa- 
franca,  225-226),  Austria,  France, 
and  Sardinia,  228;  Turin  (1860), 
France  and  Sardinia,  231;  1860, 
Treaty  of  Commerce,  France 
and  England,  274;  London 
(1861),  England,  Spain,  and 
France  agree  to  joint  interven- 
tion in  Mexico,  277;  Vienna 
(1864),  Denmark,  Austria,  and 
Prussia,  259,  593;  Gastein 
(1865),  Prussia  and  Austria, 
259-260;  Alliance  (1866),  Prus- 
sia and  Italy,  261 ;  Prague 
(1866),  Prussia  and  Austria 
(Preliminary  at  Nikolsburg), 
263,  266-268;  Versailles  and 
Frankfort  (1871),  Germany  and 
France,  300-301,  338;  Berlin 
Memorandum  (1876),  620;  San 
Stefano  (1878),  Russia  and 
Turkey,  624;  Berlin  ^-^878;, 
625-626;  Austro-German  (1879), 
321;  Triple  Alliance,  Germany, 
Austria,  and  Italy  (1882),  319- 
321,  382;  Berlin  (1884-1885), 
concerning  Congo  Free  State, 
555-556;  Bucharest  (1886),  Bul- 
garia and  Servia,  629;  Dual  Al- 
liance (1891),  France  and  Rus- 
sia, 357;  Shimonoseki  (1895), 
China  and  Japan,  695-696;  Paris 
(1898),  Spain  and  the  United 
States,  574;  Anglo-Japanese 
(1902),  700;  Carlstad  (1905), 
Sweden  and  Norway,  599-600; 
Portsmouth  (1905),  Russia  and 
Japan,  702-703 

Treaty   ports    (China),   685 

Treitschke,  149,  246 


826 


INDEX 


Trevelyan,  Sir  George,  on  the 
policy  of  coercion  in  Ireland, 
505 

Tribune  (The),  prosecution  of,  un- 
der the  July  Monarchy,  124 

Trinidad,  retained  by  England  in 
1815,  9,  519 

Trinity  College  (Dublin),  484 

Triple  Alliance,  1882,  319-322,  357, 
382,  640 

Triple  Entente,  736 

Tripoli,  one  of  the  Barbary  States, 
372;  in  1S15,  551 

Tripolitza,  taken  by  Greeks,  606 

Trocadero,  63 

Trochu,  General,  Head  of  the  Gov- 
ernment of  National  Defense, 
297 

Troppau,  Congress  of  (1820),  59- 
QO 

Tsushima,  Straits  of,  naval  battle 
of  the,  1905,  702 

Tunis,  seized  by  France,  1881,  321; 
France  establishes  a  protectorate 
over  (1881),  353,  374,  554;  Pic- 
quart  sent  to,  359;  one  of  the 
Barbary  States,  372;  in  1815,  551, 
602 

Turgenieff,  652;  definition  of  a 
Nihilist,  666 

Turin,  54,  61;  parliament  meets  at, 
230,  237;  Treaty  of  (1860),  231; 
capital  of  Italy  to  1865,  378; 
riots  in  (1889),  383 

Turkestan,  conquest  of,  by  Russia 
(1845-1885),  682 

Turkey,  war  with  Mehemet  Ali, 
131 ;  interference  of  Russia  in, 
and  Treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi 
(1833),  132;  England  comes  to 
the  aid  of,  132;  London  Con- 
ference (1840),  132;  protects 
Kossuth  and  other  Hungarian 
leaders,  180;  war  in  the  Crimea, 
219,  654 ;  loss  of  Algeria,  372-373 ; 
Austria-Hungary  and,  405;  ques- 
tion of  the  integrity  of  (1816), 
489;  position  of,  in  Africa,  1815, 
551;  relation  of  Egypt  to,  557; 
decay  of  the  Ottoman  Empire, 
601;  the  ruling  class  in,  602;  the 
Eastern  Question,  602;  treatment 
of  subject  peoples,  603;  revolt 
of  the  Servians,  604;  Servia  be- 
comes an  autonomous  principal- 
ity tributary  to  the  Sultan,  604; 
and  the  Greek  War  of  Independ- 
ence, 604-611 ;  calls  upon  Mehemet 


Turkey,  continued 

Ali,  of  Egypt,  for  aid,  607;  for- 
eign intervention,  607-610;  battle 
of  Navarino,  1821,  610;  war  with 
Russia,  1821-1828,  610,  654; 
Treaty  of  Adrianople,  1829,  611; 
Greece  becomes  a  kingdom,  611; 
and  the  "  holy  places  "  in  Pales- 
tine, 612;  war  with  Russia,  612- 
616;  Treaty  of  Paris,  1856,  615; 
admitted  to  the  European  Con- 
cert, 616;  from  the  Treaty  of 
Paris  to  the  Treaty  of  Berlin, 
617-627;  union  of  the  Danubian 
Principalities  into  Roumania, 
1862,  618;  insurrection  of  Her- 
zegovina, 1815,  620;  BerHn 
Memorandum,  1816,  620;  acces- 
sion of  Abdul  Hamid  II,  621; 
the  Bulgarian  atrocities,  1816, 
621-622;  Ser\ia  and  Montenegro 
declare  war,  622-623;  Russia  de- 
clares war,  1811,  623;  siege  of 
Plevna,  623;  Treaty  of  San 
Stefano,  1818,  624;  Congress  of 
Berlin,  1818,  revises  Treaty  of 
San  Stefano,  625-626;  union  of 
the  two  Bulgarias,  626;  Greece 
declares  war  against  (1891),  635; 
revolution  in,  636-644;  Revolu- 
tion of  July,  1908,  636;  restora- 
tion of  the  Constitution  of  1816, 
637;  aims  of  the  Young  Turks, 
637-638;  Bulgaria  declares  its 
independence,  October  5,  1908, 
631,  639;  attitude  of  foreign 
Powers,  638-640;  Austria-Hun- 
gary annexes  Bosnia  and  Her- 
zegovina, 1908,  639;  declares  in 
favor  of  peace,  641;  Austria- 
Hungary  and  Bulgaria  negotiate 
with,  (1908),  641 ;  opening  of  the 
Turkish  Parliament  (1908),  642; 
counter-revolution  of  April, 
1909,  642;  the  Young  Turks  re- 
gain control  and  depose  the 
Sultan  Abdul  Hamid  II,  642- 
643;  accession  of  Mohammed  V, 
1909,  643.  See  The  Disruption 
of  the  Ottoman  Empire  and  the 
Rise  of  the  Balkan  States,  601- 
644 

Tuscany,  t'le  dominance  of  Aus- 
tria in,  9,  52-53;  reforms  in,  167; 
cooperates  in  insurrection  against 
Austria,  173;  recalls  troops,  175; 
declared  a  republic,  181;  restora- 
tion of  the  Grand  Duke  of,  182; 


INDEX 


827 


Tuscany,  contirmed 
reaction  in,  after  iS^S,  215; 
agreement  at  Plombieres  con- 
cerning, 223;  restoration  of  the 
Grand  Duke  of,  226;  annexed  to 
Piedmont  (1860),  230;  govern- 
ment of,  377 

Tyrol,  The,  8 

Uitlanders,  and  the  Boers,  541 

Ulster  System,  "  tenant  right "  of 
land  tenure,  475 

Ultras,  The  (France,  1815),  72; 
Louis  XVIII  checks,  74-75; 
activity  of,  78;  triumph  of,  82 

Umbria,  235;  annexation  of,  to 
Piedmont,   236 

Union,  Act  of,  1800,  497 

Union  of  South  Africa  (1909),  544- 
545,  549 

United  Landtag,  of  Prussia,  151; 
conflict  between  Frederick  Wil- 
liam IV  and,  152 

United  States,  cooperate  with  Eng- 
land to  prevent  the  conquest  of 
the  Spanish-American  colonies 
by  the  Holy  Alliance,  64-65;  the 
Monroe  Doctrine  in,  64-65;  Ger- 
man emigration  to,  241;  and  the 
Mexican  Expedition,  277;  inter- 
vention of,  in  Mexico,  279;  Bis- 
marck on  the  policy  of  protection 
in,  311;  Italian  emigration  to, 
386;  effect  on  England  of  the 
Civil  War  in,  461;  Irish  emigra- 
tion to,  470;  and  the  Alabama 
award,  486,  591;  and  the  Oregon 
dispute  (18-i6),  529;  growth 
of,  547;  at  Congress  of  Berlin 
(1884-1885),  555;  demand  re- 
forms in  the  Congo,  557;  recog- 
nize the  Republic  of  Spain,  572; 
Spanish-American  War  (1898), 
674;  Jewish  emigration  to,  672; 
send  Caleb  Cushing  to  make  a 
commercial  treaty  with  China 
(18U),  686;  send  Commodore 
Perry  to  Japan  (1853),  690; 
Treaty  of,  with  Japan  (1854), 
691 ;  help  to  rescue  the  legations 
in  Peking,  698;  diplomatic  nego- 
tiations of,  with  Russia  concern- 
ing Manchuria,  700;  Russo- 
Japanese  Treaty  at  Portsmouth, 
New  Hampshire,  1905,  702-703 

Universities,  ferment  in  German, 
39;  control  of  German,  under 
Metternich,    41-42;    in     Prague, 


Universities,  continued 
400;  representation  of,  in  Great 
Britain,  412,  note;  religious  tests 
of,  in  Great  Britain  abolished, 
483;  in  Ireland  by  the  Birrell 
Act  (1908),  516;  State,  founded 
in  Belgium,  582;  in  Greece,  634; 
in  Japan,  693 

Unkiar  Skelessi,  Treaty  of  (1833), 
132 

Valais,   585 

Valen^ay,  47 

Vatican,  379 

Vaud,  585 

Venetia,  disposition  of,  by  First 
Treaty  of  Paris  (1814),  3; 
disposition  of,  by  Peace  of  Villa- 
franca,  226;  not  included  in  the 
new  Kingdom  of  Italy  (1861), 
237;  ceded  to  Italy  by  Austria 
(1866),  267,  376 

Venice,  52;  the  leading  city  of 
Venetia,  172;  declares  itself  a 
republic,  173;  fall  of  (1849), 
182 

Verona,  Congress  of,  62-63;  for- 
tress of,  173 

Versailles,  armistice  of  (1871), 
299;  peace  of,  300-301;  declared 
the  capital  (1811),  330;  war  be- 
tween Paris  and  the  Government 
of,  333-336;  capital  transferred 
from  (1880),  352 

Viborg  Manifesto  (1906),  715 

Victor  Emmanuel  I,  King  of  Sar- 
dinia, government  of,  54-55;  ab- 
dicates, 61 

Victor  Emmanuel  II,  suc- 
ceeds his  father  as  King  of 
Sardinia,  181 ;  accession  and  char- 
acter, 216;  and  the  interview  at 
Plombiferes,  222-223;  attitude  of, 
toward  the  Preliminaries  of 
Villafranca,  227;  accepts  the 
sovereignty  of  Modena,  Parma, 
Tuscany,  and  the  Romagna,  230; 
advances  with  his  army  into  the 
Kingdom  of  Naples,  236;  and 
Garibaldi,  237;  all  Italy  (except- 
ing Rome  and  Venetia)  united 
under  his  sovereignty  (1861), 
237;  allied  with  Prussia  in  war 
against  Austria  (1866),  261; 
gains  Venetia,  267;  neutrality  of, 
in  Franco-German  War,  294; 
takes  possession  of  Rome,  301 ; 
programme  of  (1870),  377;  and 


828 


INDEX 


Victor  Emmanuel  II,  continiied 
the    Papacy,   378-379;    death    of 
(ISIS),  380 

Victor  Emmanuel  III,  King  of 
Italy,  1900 — ,  succeeds  his 
father,  Humbert  I,  SSI;  visited 
by  President  Loubet,  of  France 
(IdO-'t),  368;  character  of,  384; 
industrial  expansion  under,  385; 
increase  of  population  under, 
386;  and  the  problem  of  emigra- 
tion under,  386;  and  the  mon- 
archy in  Italy,  387 

Victoria  (British  colony),  and  the 
secret  ballot,  484;  responsible 
government  granted  to,  527;  in 
the  Australian  Commonwealth, 
532;  legislation  of,  536 

Victoria,  Queen  of  England,  1837- 
1901,  accession  and  political 
education,  445;  marriage  to 
Prince  Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg, 
ISItO,  445;  and  Hanover,  446; 
abolishes  purchase  in  the  army 
by  royal  ordinance,  1811,  482; 
proclaimed  Empress  of  India 
(1811),  489,  622:,  death  of, 
513 

Victoria   Nyanza,  552 

Vienna,  see  Congress  of  Vienna; 
center  of  European  affairs,  iSio- 
18^8,  28;  Conference  of  (1820), 
44;  industrial  revolution  in, 
153;  storm  center  of  18k8,  169; 
riots  in  (1848),  170;  Bohemian 
delegation  sent  to,  172;  out- 
break in,  178;  Treaty  of  (186k), 
259,  593;  Hungary  governed 
from,  388;  and  the  Delegations, 
394;  capital  of  Austria,  395, 
397 

Vilagos,  Capitulation  of,  180 

Villafranca,  Preliminaries  of 
(1859),  225-226;  annexations 
after,  228-232 

Vill^le,  Ministry  of  (1822-1828), 
82,   88;    fall   of,   89 

Villemain,  89 

Villiers,  and  the  Anti-Corn-Law 
League,  452 

Vinogradoff,  on  the  government 
of  Russia  and  the  condition  of 
the  peasantry  (1902),  677 

Virchow,  246 

Vladivostok,  founded  by  Russia  as 
a  naval  base,  1860,  682,  687; 
Russia  secures  the  right  to  ex- 
tend her  Trans-Siberian  railroad 


Vladivostok,  contimied 

to,    697;    Russian   fleet   at,    701; 

Japan  defeats  the  fleet  of,  702 
Volta,  385 
Vorparlament,   174 

Waldeck,  327 

Waldeck-Rousseau,  leader  of  the 
"Bloc,"  364;  Prime  Minister 
(1900-1902),  speech  at  Toulouse 
concerning  the  question  of 
Church  and  State,  365;  and  the 
Law  of  Associations,  July  1, 
1901,  366 

Wales,  representation  of,  in  House 
of  Commons,  1815,  410;  Glad- 
stonian  vote  in,  1886,  504;  County 
Councils  Act  of  1888,  506;  Old 
Age  Pensions  Law  in,  516 

Wallachia,  part  of  the  Ottoman 
Empire  (1815),  601.  See  Danu- 
bian  Principalities. 

Wallon  Amendment,  345 

Walpole,  Sir  Spencer,  on  the  Eng- 
lish inventors,  408  and  note;  on 
the  elections  of  1793,  413;  on 
the  death  penalty  for  offenses, 
423,  note;  on  Postal  Savings 
Banks,  459;  on  Australia,  530 

Warsaw,  Grand  Duchy  of,  5;  de- 
manded by  Russia  at  Congress 
of  Vienna,  6;  division  of,  8;  be- 
comes Kingdom  of  Poland,  647. 
See  Poland. 

Warsaw,  Grand  Duke  driven  from, 
108;  fall  of,  109;  capital  of 
Poland,  647,  663 

Wartburg   Festival,   39-40,    112 

Waterloo,  13,  129,  145,  170,  207, 
406,  418 

Watt,  James,  and  the  steam  en- 
gine,  407,   721 

"  Wealth  of  Nations,"  by  Adam 
Smith,   417 

"  Weekly  Political  Register,  The," 
published  by  Cobbett,  419 

Wellington,  capital  of  New  Zea- 
land, 534 

Wellington,  Duke  of,  408;  and  the 
Catholic  Emancipation  Act 
(1829),  427,  428;  on  parlia- 
mentary reform,  429;  ministry 
of,  put  out  of  oflBce,  430;  asked 
to  form  a  ministry,  fails,  436; 
and  the  Chartist  agitation  in 
London,  449 

West  Indies,  French  possessions 
in,  371;   slavery  in  the   English 


INDEX 


829 


West  Indies,  continued 
colonies    of,    and    its    abolition, 
439-440;   English   possessions   in, 
519;   Dutch   possessions   in,   581; 
Danish   possessions  in,  594 

Western  Africa,  374 

Western  Australia,  responsible 
government  granted  to,  1890, 
528;  in  the  Australian  Common- 
wealth,  532 

Westminster  Abbey,  Gladstone 
buried  in  (1898),  510;  Living- 
stone buried  in,  553 

Wet,  Christian  de,  in  the  South 
African   War,   543 

Wetherell,  Sir  C,  speech  against 
the  Reform  Bill,  433;  on  Second 
Reform  Bill,  435 

Weyler,  574 

White  Terror,  The  (France),  73- 
74 

Wilberforce,  and  the  anti-slavery 
agitation,  440 

Wilhelmina,  Queen  of  Holland, 
1890—,  579 

William  I,  King  of  Holland,  1814- 
1840,  102,  104;  promulgates 
the  Fundamental  Law  of  1815, 
579 

William  II.,  King  of  Holland, 
1840-1849,  579;  and  the  Consti- 
tution of  1848,  580 

William  III,  King  of  Holland, 
1849-1890,  579;  extension  of  the 
suffrage,  1887,  581 

William  I,  King  of  Prussia,  1861- 
1888,  German  Emperor,  1871- 
1888,  becomes  Regent  (1858), 
247;  succeeds  his  brother  Fred- 
erick William  IV,  247;  char- 
acterization of,  248;  and  army 
reform  (1860),  249-250;  ap- 
points Bismarck  President  of 
the  Ministry,  250;  and  the 
Danish  War,  258;  alliance  with 
Italy  against  Austria,  261 ;  at 
Koiiiggratz,  265;  becomes  Presi- 
dent of  the  North  German  Con- 
federation, 269;  alliance  with 
the  South  German  States,  270; 
interview  of,  with  Benedetti  at 
Ems  on  the  candidacy  of  Prince 
Leopold  to  the  Spanish  throne, 
292;  becomes  German  Emperor, 
301 ;  his  powers  as  Emperor, 
303-304;  Emperor,  1871-1888, 
305;  and  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  305-310;  and  Socialism, 


William   I,   continued 

313,  315;  attempts  upon  the 
life  of,  313;  alliance  of  the 
Three  Emperors,  320;  death  of, 
322 

William  II,  King  of  Prussia  and 
German  Emperor,  1888 — ,  ac- 
cession and  character  of,  322; 
demands  resignation  of  Bis- 
marck (1890),  323;  policy  of, 
since  1890,  323;  his  chancellors, 
323;  anti-Socialist  policy  aban- 
doned, 323;  expansion  of  Ger- 
man industry  and  commerce 
under,  324;  and  the  navy,  324; 
interview  with,  published  in  the 
London  Telegraph,  October  28, 
1908,  and  demand  for  ministerial 
responsibility,  327 

William  IV,  King  of  England, 
1830-1837,  accession  of,  428; 
and  the  Third  Reform  Bill,  436; 
death   of,   445 

Wilson,  son-in-law  of  President 
Grdvy,  355 

Windischgratz,  commander  of  the 
troops  in  Prague,  175;  conquers 
Vienna,  178 

Witte,  Sergius  de,  Minister  of 
Finance  and  Commerce  (1892), 
policy  of,  674-676;  appointed 
Prime  Minister  (1905),  712; 
resigns,  713;  and  the  trans- 
formation of  the  mir  (1909), 
717 

Wolseley,  General,  in  Egypt,  559 

Woman  Suffrage,  in  England, 
Mill's  speech  in  favor  of,  464; 
present  status  of,  516-517;  in 
New  Zealand,  536;  in  Denmark, 
594;  in  Norway,  600;  in  Fin- 
land,  718 

Worth,  battle  of,  296 

Wiirtemberg,  King  of,  at  Congress 
of  Vienna,  4;  position  in  the 
Diet,  29-30;  granted  a  constitu- 
tion (1819),  37;  supports  Aus- 
tria in  the  War  of  1866,  263; 
joins  Prussia  in  the  Franco- 
Prussian  war  (1870),  294;  be- 
comes part  of  the  German  Em- 
pire, 301 

Yalu,  battle  of  the,  695,  701 
Yedo,  689;  Mikado  establishes  the 

government     at,     692;     becomes 

Tokio,  692 
Yokohama,  693 


830 


INDEX 


«i 


Yorkshire,  gain  in  House  of  Com- 
mons by  Redistribution  Act  of 
1SS5    494' 

Young'  Italy,  Society  of,  161-163, 
232 

Young  Turks,  636-644 

Zambesi  River,  Livingstone  traces 
the  course  of,  552 

Zemstvos,  established  by  Alex- 
ander II   (1864),  660;  restricted 


Zemstvos,    continued 
by   Alexander    III,    671;    Prince 
Sviatopolk  Mirski  and,  708 

Zola,  Emile,  and  the  Dreyfus  Case, 
360-363;  body  of,  transferred  to 
the  Pantheon   (1908),  363 

ZoUverein,  148;  advantages  of,  149 

Zurich,  Peace  of  (1859),  228,  389; 
Diet  at,  584;  constitution  of  the 
canton  of,  on  the  initiative  and 
the  referendum,  589 


AMERICAN   HISTORICAL  scxvx^^ 


Under  the  editorship  of  Charles  H.  Raskins,  Professor  of 
History  in  Harvard  University. 

A  series  of  text-books  intended,  like  the  American  Science 
Series,  to  be  comprehensive,  systematic,  and  authoritative. 
The  series  will  aim  to  justify  the  title  "American"  not  only 
by  its  American  authorship  but  also  by  specifically  regarding 
American  educational  needs. 

The  treatment  will  be  descriptive  as  well  as  narrative,  and 
due  attention  will  be  given  to  economic  and  social  conditions 
and  to  institutional  development. 

Ready 

Europe  Since  1815. 

By  Charles  D.  Hazen.    School  Edition.  $3.00.    Library  Edition, 

I3-7S- 
Historical  Atlas. 

By  William   R.   Shepherd,  Professor  in  Columbia  University. 

82.50. 

Atlas  of  Ancient  History. 

By  William  R.  Shepherd.  90  cents. 

American  Diplomacy. 

By  Carl  Russell  Fish,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Wisconsin. 
School  Edition,  I2.25.    Library  Edition,  $2.75. 

History  of  England 

By  L.  M.  Larson,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Illinois.       $1.40. 

In  preparatio7i 

Medieval  and  Modern  Europe. 

By  Charles  W.  Colby,  Professor  in  McGill  University. 
The  Reformation. 

By  Preserved  Smith. 

The  Renaissance. 

By  Ferdinand  Schevill,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Chicago. 

Europe  in  the  XVH.  and  XVHI.  Centuries. 
By  Sidney  B.  Fay,  Professor  in  Smith  College. 

History  of  Greece. 

By  Paul  Shorey,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Chicago. 

History  of  Rome. 

By  Jesse  B.  Carter,  Director  of  the  American  School  of  Clas- 
sical Studies  at  Rome. 

History  of  Germany. 

By  Guy  Stanton  Ford,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Minnesota. 
History  of  the  Uni*^-^ 

By  Frederick  J.      1 1 1|  |{|{||  m  {|j{|  ||||  ||||  |||{  ||  {|{|  {|||  {|{{  {||{  |{|||{  |{  |||{  { \\     ity. 


henry      H<    IlllillllllllilllllllllllllHWIIli™"    i.NY 
,4  w.„  33.  s...„      3  1210  00333  6656    ^  ^^^^ 


